Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

  • 제15권19호
  • /
  • Pages.8149-8153
  • /
  • 2014
  • /
  • 1513-7368(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2476-762X(eISSN)
아시아태평양암예방학회 (Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative Study of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis for Identifying Benign and Malignant Breast Tumor Lumps

  • Liu, Jian (Department of Ultrasound, Xinqiao Hospital, Affiliated to The Third Military Medical University) ;
  • Gao, Yun-Hua (Department of Ultrasound, Xinqiao Hospital, Affiliated to The Third Military Medical University) ;
  • Li, Ding-Dong (Department of general surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Chuanbei Medical College) ;
  • Gao, Yan-Chun (Department of general surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Chuanbei Medical College) ;
  • Hou, Ling-Mi (Department of general surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Chuanbei Medical College) ;
  • Xie, Ting (Department of general surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Chuanbei Medical College)
  • 발행 : 2014.10.23
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Background: To compare the value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) qualitative and quantitative analysis in the identification of breast tumor lumps. Materials and Methods: Qualitative and quantitative indicators of CEUS for 73 cases of breast tumor lumps were retrospectively analyzed by univariate and multivariate approaches. Logistic regression was applied and ROC curves were drawn for evaluation and comparison. Results: The CEUS qualitative indicator-generated regression equation contained three indicators, namely enhanced homogeneity, diameter line expansion and peak intensity grading, which demonstrated prediction accuracy for benign and malignant breast tumor lumps of 91.8%; the quantitative indicator-generated regression equation only contained one indicator, namely the relative peak intensity, and its prediction accuracy was 61.5%. The corresponding areas under the ROC curve for qualitative and quantitative analyses were 91.3% and 75.7%, respectively, which exhibited a statistically significant difference by the Z test (P<0.05). Conclusions: The ability of CEUS qualitative analysis to identify breast tumor lumps is better than with quantitative analysis.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Angelelli P, Nylund K, Odd HG, et al (2011). Interactive visual analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound data based on small neighborhood statistics. Computers Graphics, 35, 218-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cag.2010.12.005
  2. Barnard S, Leen E, Cooke T, et al (2008). A contrast-enhanced ultrasound study of benign and malignant breast tissue. S Afr Med J, 98, 386-91.
  3. Boonlikit S (2013). Comparison of mammography in combination with breast ultrasonography versus mammography alone for breast cancer screening in asymptomatic women. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 14, 7731-6. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2013.14.12.7731
  4. Caproni N, Marchisio F, Pecchi A, et al (2010). Contrastenhanced ultrasound in the characterisation of breast masses: utility of quantitative analysis in comparison with MRI. Eur Radiology, 20, 1384-95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1690-1
  5. Drevs J (2008). VEGF and angiogenesis: implications for breast cancer therapy. Eur J Cancer, 6, 7-13.
  6. Du J, Li FH, Fang H, et al (2008). Microvascular architecture of breast lesions: evaluation with contrast-enhanced ultrasonographic micro flow imaging. J Ultrasound Med, 27, 833-42.
  7. Du J, Wang L, Wan CF, et al (2012). Differentiating benign from malignant solid breast lesions: Combined utility of conventional ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol, 81, 3890-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.09.004
  8. Fleischer AC (2000). Sonographic depiction of tumor vascularity and flow from in vivo models to clinical applications. J Ultrasound Med, 19, 55-61.
  9. Gauthier TP, Averkiou MA and Leen EL (2011). Perfusion quantification using dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound: the impact of dynamic range and gain on time-intensity curves. Ultrasonics, 51, 102-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultras.2010.06.004
  10. Ignee A, Jedrejczyk M, Schuessler G, et al (2010). Quantitative contrast enhanced ultrasound of the liver for time intensity curves Reliability and potential sources of errors. Eur J Radiol, 73, 153-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.10.016
  11. Metz S, Daldrup-Unk HE, Richter T, et al (2003). Detection and quantification of breast tumor necrosis with MR imaging: value of the necrosis-avid contrast agent Gadophrin-3. Academic Radiol, 10, 484-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80056-9
  12. Palmowski M, Lederle W, Gaetjens J, et al (2010). Comparison of conventional time-intensity curve VS maximum intensity over time for post-processing of dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Eur J Radiol, 75, 149-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.10.030
  13. Ricci P, Cantisani V, Ballesio L, et al (2007). Benign and malignant breast lesions: efficacy of real time contrastenhanced ultrasound vs. magnetic resonance imaging. Ultraschall Med, 28, 57-62. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2006-927226
  14. Ricci P, Cantisani V, Ballesio L, et al (2007). Benign and malignant breast lesions: efficacy of real time contrastenhanced ultrasound vs. magnetic resonance imaging. Ultraschall Med, 28, 57-62. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2006-927226
  15. Taylor KJ, Merritt C, Piccoli C, et al (2002). Ultrasound as a complement to mammography and breast examination to characterize breast masses. Ultrasound Med Biol, 28, 19-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-5629(01)00491-4
  16. Wan C, Du J, Fang H, et al (2012). Evaluation of breast lesions by contrast enhanced ultrasound: qualitative and quantitative analysis. Eur J Radiol, 81, 444-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.03.094
  17. Wang FL, Chen F, Yin H, et al (2013). Effects of age, breast density and volume on breast cancer diagnosis: a retrospective comparison of sensitivity of mammography and ultrasonography in China's rural areas. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 14, 2277-82. https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2013.14.4.2277
  18. Wang Z, Tang J, An L, Wang W, et al (2007). Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for assessment of tumor vascularity in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Ultrasound Med, 26, 757-62.
  19. Zhao H, Xu R, Ouyang Q, et al (2010). Contrast-enhanced ultrasound is helpful in the differentiation of malignant and benign breast lesions. Eur J Radiol, 73, 288-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.05.043

피인용 문헌

  1. Predictive model for contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the breast: Is it feasible in malignant risk assessment of breast imaging reporting and data system 4 lesions? vol.8, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v8.i6.600