Journals / Ege Klinikleri Tıp Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 58 - Sayı: 3

The Role of Elasticity / B Mode Ultrasonography in the Differentiation of Malignant and Benign Breast Lesions

Malign ve Benign Meme Lezyonlarının Ayırımında Elastisite / B Mod Ultrasonografinin Yeri

Pages
279–283
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Using this method, unnecessary biopsies, patient anxiety, and loss of work force may be prevented.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of the elasticity / B mode ratio in detecting malignancy in breast masses through specific malignant and benign diseases.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material-Methods: From patients undergoing elastography 73 cases of fibroadenoma and 73 cases of nonspecific invasive ductal cancer which diagnosed by biopsy were included to the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Using this method, unnecessary biopsies, patient anxiety, and loss of work force may be prevented.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of the elasticity / B mode ratio in detecting malignancy in breast masses through specific malignant and benign diseases. Material-Methods: From patients undergoing elastography 73 cases of fibroadenoma and 73 cases of nonspecific invasive ductal cancer which diagnosed by biopsy were included to the study. Cases of ductal carcinoma insitu, lobular cancer, ductolobular cancer, specific breast cancers, complicated cystic lesions, adenosis and mastitis were excluded. Results: In the malignant group, the elasticity / B mode ratios ranged from 0.85 to 1.81 and the mean ratio was 1.38 ± 0.25, while in the benign group it ranged from 0.80-1.12 and the mean ratio was 0.91 ± 0.39. The false negativity rate was 9.6% (7/73) and the false positivity rate was 15.1% (11/73). Elasticity / B mode parameter was found to have moderate sensitivity, specificity and accuracy (90.4%, 84.9%, 87.7%, respectively). Conclusion: Elasticity/ B mod ratio contributes to the malignant-benign distinction in breast masses. Using this method, unnecessary biopsies, patient anxiety, and loss of work force may be prevented.

Özet

Giriş ve amaç: Bu çalışmada amaç, meme kitlelerinde elastisite/B-mod ultrasonografi oranının malignite saptamadaki doğruluğunu değerlendirmektir. Yöntem: Elastografi uygulanan hastalar arasından, biyopsi ile tanı alan 73 nonspesifik invaziv duktal kanser ile 73 fibroadenom olgusu çalışmaya dahil edildi. Duktal karsinoma insitu, lobüler kanser, duktolobüler kanser, spesifik meme kanserleri, komplike kistik lezyonlar, adenozis ve mastit olguları çalışma dışında bırakıldı. Bulgular: Malign grupta elastisite/B mod oranları 0.85 ile 1.81 arasında değişmekte olup ortalama oran 1.38 ± 0.25 iken benign grupta 0.80-1.12 arasında değişmekte olup ortalama oran 0.91 ± 0.39 idi. Yanlış negatiflik oranı 9.6 % (7/73), yanlış pozitiflik oranı 15.1 % (11/73) idi. Elastogram / B mod parametresinin orta derecede duyarlılık, özgüllük ve doğruluğa sahip olduğu saptandı ( sırasıyla 90.4 %, 84.9 %, 87.7 %). Tartışma ve sonuç: Elastisite/B mod oranı, meme kitlelerinde malign-benign ayrımına katkı sağlamaktadır. Bu yöntem kullanılarak gereksiz biyopsiler önlenebilir, hasta anksyetesi ve iş gücü kaybının önüne geçilebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

SEZGİN, G., GÜR, E. Ö., BİRLİK, B. İ., APAYDIN, M., HACIYANLI, S. (2020). The Role of Elasticity / B Mode Ultrasonography in the Differentiation of Malignant and Benign Breast Lesions. Ege Klinikleri Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 58 - Sayı: 3, 279–283. https://ajindex.com/articles/217836

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Barr RG, Destounis S, Lackey LB 2nd, Svensson WE, Balleyguier C, Smith C. Evaluation of Breast Lesions UsingSonographic Elasticity Imaging: a multicentrial trial. J Ultrasound Med 2012; 31:281–287
  2. Barr RG. Sonographic breast elastography: a primer. J UltrasoundMed 2012;31:773-783
  3. Youk JH, Gweon HM, Son EJ. Shear-wave elastography inbreast ultrasonography: the state of the art. Ultrasonography2017;36:300- 309
  4. Grajo JR, Barr RG. Strain elastography for prediction of breastcancer tumor grades. J Ultrasound Med 2014;33:129-134
  5. Alhabshi SM, Rahmat K, Abdul Halim N, Aziz S, Radhika S, GanGC, et al. Semi-quantitative and qualitative assessment of breastultrasound elastography in differentiating between malignant andbenign lesions. Ultrasound Med Biol 2013;39:568-578
  6. Farrokh A, Wojcinski S, Degenhardt F. Diagnostic value of strainratio measurement in the differentiation of malignant and benignbreast lesions. Ultraschall Med 2011;32:400-405
  7. Stachs A, Hartmann S, Stubert J, Dieterich M, Martin A, Kundt G, etal. Differentiating between malignant and benign breast masses:factors limiting sonoelastographic strain ratio. Ultraschall Med2013;34:131-136
  8. Sousaris N, Barr RG. Sonoelastography of breast lymphoma.Ultrasound Q 2016;32:208-211
  9. Barr RG. Breast elastography. New York: Thieme Publishers, 2014
  10. Sousaris N, Barr RG. Sonographic elastography of mastitis. JUltrasound Med 2016;35:1791-1797
  11. Barr RG. Future of breast elastography. Ultrasonography 2019;38:93-105
  12. Meier-Meitinger M, Häberle L, Fasching PA, Bani MR, Heusinger K, Wachter D, et al. Assessment of breast cancer tumour size using six different methods. Eur Radiol. 2011 Jun;21(6):1180-7.