Journals / Tanısal ve Girişimsel Radyoloji (Yeni Adı: Dİagnostic & Intervent. Radiol) / 2003 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 2

Contrast enhanced power Doppler and color Doppler ultrasound in breast masses: Efficiency in diagnosis and contributions to differential diagnosis

Meme kitlelerinde kontrastlı power Doppler ve renkli Doppler US: Tanısal etkinlikleri ve ayırıcı tanıya katkıları

Pages
199–206
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)

Thus, it is possible to decrease the number of unnecessary surgical interventions.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:PURPOSE: To compare ability of detection of vascular structures by utilizing ultrasonographic contrast agent (Levovist) prior to and following power Doppler ultrasound (PDUS) and colour Doppler ultrasound (CDUS) and to determine useful parameters in the differentiation of malignant and benign breast masses by means of verified data.
📊
Key Findings & Data:MATERIALS AND METHODS: Vascularisation characteristics of 38 breast masses (22 malignant,16 benign) which were confirmed by mammography and B-mode sonography were evaluated by both CDUS and PDUS following and prior to intravenous contrast application.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Thus, it is possible to decrease the number of unnecessary surgical interventions.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Tanı · ayırıcı · Meme neoplazmları

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare ability of detection of vascular structures by utilizing ultrasonographic contrast agent (Levovist) prior to and following power Doppler ultrasound (PDUS) and colour Doppler ultrasound (CDUS) and to determine useful parameters in the differentiation of malignant and benign breast masses by means of verified data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Vascularisation characteristics of 38 breast masses (22 malignant,16 benign) which were confirmed by mammography and B-mode sonography were evaluated by both CDUS and PDUS following and prior to intravenous contrast application. In addition, Vmax and RI values of vascular structures were calculated by Doppler spectral evaluation. RESULTS: Malignant lesions showed more vascularity than benign lesions both with and without contrast enhancement. With both methods, by utilizing contrast agent, central, penetrating and tortuous vascular structures became more significant in malignant lesions when compared with benign lesions. PDUS was able to detect vascular structures better than CDUS; however, the difference was not statistically significant. Presence of peripheral vascularity was not useful in differentiating malignant from benign lesions. Vmax and RI values were higher in malignant lesions and the difference was statistically significant. In both methods, Vmax >15 cm/sec and RI> 0.80 (CDUS), and RI>0.70 (PDUS) were accepted as malignancy parameters. CONCLUSION: Vascular patterns of breast masses as determined with PDUS and CDUS with contrast enhancement and Doppler spectral examinations enabled differentiation of malignant and benign breast lesions. Thus, it is possible to decrease the number of unnecessary surgical interventions.

Özet

AMAÇ US kontrast ajanı (Levovist) kullanımı öncesi ve sonrasında power Doppler US (PDUS) ve renkli Doppler US'nin (RDUS) damar yapılarını saptayabilme yeteneklerini karşılaştırmak ve elde ettiğimiz bilgiler ile meme kitlelerinin malign-benign ayrımında kullanılabilecek ölçütler belirlemek. GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM Mamografi ve B-mod sonografi ile tespit edilen 38 meme kitleli olgu (22 malign, 16 benign) intravenöz kontrast madde (Levovist) öncesi ve sonrasında vaskülarizasyon özellikleri (damar sayısı, periferal, santral, penetran ve tortüyöz damar varlığı) açısından hem RDUS hem PDUS ile değerlendirildi. Ayrıca Doppler spektral değerlendirme ile vasküler yapılara ait Vmax (maksimum sistolik hız) ve RI (rezistivite indeksi) değerleri hesaplandı. Kontrastsız ve kontrastlı incelemelerde malign lezyonlar, benign lezyonlara göre çok daha vaskülerdi. Kontrast kullanılmasıyla her iki yöntemde de santral, penetran ve tortüyöz vasküler yapılar malign lezyonlarda benign lezyonlara göre anlamlı şekilde arttı. PDUS vasküler yapıları RDUS'den daha üstün bir şekilde saptadı, ancak bu fark istatistiksel olarak anlamlı değildi. Periferal vaskülarite varlığı malign-benign lezyon ayrımında yarar sağlamadı. Vmax ve RI değerleri malign lezyonlarda benign lezyonlara göre yüksekti ve bu fark istatistiksel olarak anlamlıydı. Her iki yöntemde Vmax için >15 cm/sn, RDUS kullanıldığında RI >0.80, PDUS kullanıldığında RI>0.70 değerleri malignite ölçütü olarak kabul edildi. SONUÇ Kontrastlı RDUS ve PDUS ile meme kitlelerinde vasküler paternler ve Doppler spektral incelemelere dayanılarak, malign-benign lezyon ayrımı güvenle yapılabilir ve böylece gereksiz cerrahi girişimler azaltılabilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ALGÜL, A., BALCI, P., SEÇİL, M., CANDA, T. (2003). Contrast enhanced power Doppler and color Doppler ultrasound in breast masses: Efficiency in diagnosis and contributions to differential diagnosis. Tanısal ve Girişimsel Radyoloji (Yeni Adı: Dİagnostic & Intervent. Radiol), Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 2, 199–206. https://ajindex.com/articles/363207

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Kopans DB. Breast imaging. 2nd ed. Phila-delphia: JB Lippincot, 1998: 29-614
  2. Ciatto S, Catalioitti L, distante V. Nonpal-pable lesions detected with mammog-raphy: review of 512 consecutive cases.Radiology 1987; 169:99-102
  3. Hall FM, Storella JM, Silverstone DZ,Wyshak G. Nonpalpable breast lesions: re-commendations for biopsy based on suspi-cion of carcinoma at mammography. Radi-ology 1988; 167:353-358
  4. Huber S, Delorme S, Knopp MV, et al.Breast tumors: computer-assisted quantita-tive assessment with color Doppler US.Radiology 1994; 192:797-801
  5. Kedar RP, Cosgrove D, Mc Cready VR,Bamber JC, Carter ER. Microbubble cont-rast agent for color Doppler US: effect onbreast masses. Radiology 1996; 198:679-686
  6. Schoenberger SG, Sutherland CM, Robin-son AE. Breast neoplasms: duplex sonog-raphic imaging as an adjunct in diagnosis.Radiology 1988; 168:665-668
  7. Mehta TS,Raza S. Power doppler sonog-raphy of breast cancer: Does vascularitycorrelate with node status or lymphaticvascular invasion? AJR 1999; 173:303-307 8. Goldberg BB, Liu JB, Burns PN, MertonDA, Forsberg FF. Galactose-based intrave-nous sonographic contrast agent: experi-mental studies. Ultrasound Med 1993; 12:463-470
  8. Huber S, Helbich T, Kettenbach J et al.Effects of a microbubble contrast agent onbreast tumors: computer- assisted quantita-tive assessment with color Doppler US:early experience. Radiology 1998;208:485-489
  9. Schroeder RJ. Maeurer J, Vogl TJ et al. D-Galactose based signal enhanced colorDoppler sonography of breast tumors andtumorlike lesions. Invest Radiol 1999; 34:109-115
  10. Hamper UM, DeJong MR, Caskey Cl, etal. Power Doppler imaging: clinical experi-ence and correlation with color DopplerUS and other imaging modalities. Radiog-raphics 1997; 17:499-513
  11. Choi BI, Kim TK, Han JK, et al. Powerversus conventional color Doppler sonog-raphy: comparison in the depiction of vas-culature in liver tumors. Radiology 1996;200:55-58
  12. Mac Sweeney JE, Cosgrove DO, ArensonJ. Color Doppler energy power mode ultra-sound. Clin Radiol 1996; 51:387-390
  13. Erikson R, Person HW, Dymling SO, et al.Evaluation of Doppler ultrasound for bloodperfusion measurements. Ultrasound MedBiol 1991; 17:445
  14. Moon WK, İm JG, Noh DY, Han MC.Nonpalpable breast lesions: evaluationwith power Doppler US and a microbubb-le contrast agent –initial experience. Radi-ology 2000; 217: 240-246
  15. Tozaki M, Toi M, Miyamoto Y, Fukuda K.Power Doppler sonography of breast mas-ses: correlation of Dopp