Accuracy of conventional ultrasound, contrast-enhanced ultrasound and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in assessing the size of breast cancer

被引:6
|
作者
Shi, Xian-Quan [1 ]
Dong, Yunyun [1 ]
Tan, Xiaoqu [1 ]
Yang, Peipei [1 ]
Wang, Chunmei [1 ]
Feng, Wei [1 ]
Lin, Yuxuan [1 ]
Qian, Linxue [1 ]
机构
[1] Capital Med Univ, Beijing Friendship Hosp, Dept Ultrasound, 95 Yongan Rd, Beijing 100050, Peoples R China
关键词
Ultrasound; contrast-enhanced ultrasound; dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging; breast; breast cancer; BACKGROUND PARENCHYMAL ENHANCEMENT; B-MODE ULTRASOUND; TUMOR SIZE; NEOADJUVANT CHEMOTHERAPY; STRAIN ELASTOGRAPHY; CONSERVING SURGERY; MRI IMPACT; MAMMOGRAPHY; SONOGRAPHY; LESIONS;
D O I
10.3233/CH-221456
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to investigate the accuracy of conventional ultrasound (US), contrast-enhanced US (CEUS), and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) in assessing the size of breast cancer. METHODS: In total, 49 breast cancer lesions of 48 patients were included in this study. The inclusion criteria were the performance of total mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery for treatment of breast cancer in our hospital from January 2017 to December 2020 with complete pathological results, as well as the performance of conventional US, CEUS, and DCE-MRI examinations with complete results. The exclusion criteria were non-mass breast cancer shown on conventional US or DCE-MRI, including that found on CEUS with no boundary with surrounding tissues and no confirmed tumor scope; a tumor too large to be completely displayed in the US section, thus affecting the measurement results; the presence of two nodules in the same breast that were too close to each other to be distinguished by any of the three imaging methods; and treatment with preoperative chemotherapy. Preoperative conventional US, CEUS, and DCE-MRI examinations were performed. The postoperative pathological results were taken as the gold standard. The lesion size was represented by its maximum diameter. The accuracy, overestimation, and underestimation rates of conventional US, CEUS, and DCE-MRI were compared. RESULTS: The maximum lesion diameter on US, CEUS, DCE-MRI and pathology were 1.62 +/- 0.63 cm (range, 0.6-3.5 cm), 2.05 +/- 0.75 cm (range, 1.0-4.0 cm), 1.99 +/- 0.74 cm (range, 0.7-4.2 cm) and 1.92 +/- 0.83 cm (range, 0.5-4.0 cm), respectively. The lesion size on US was significantly smaller than that of postoperative pathological tissue (P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the CEUS or DCE-MRI results and the pathological results. The underestimation rate of conventional US (55.1%, 27/49) was significantly higher than that of CEUS (20.4%, 10/49) and DCE-MRI (24.5%, 12/49) (P<0.001 and P=0.002, respectively). There was no significant difference in the accuracy of CEUS (36.7%, 18/49) and DCE-MRI (34.7%, 17/49) compared with conventional US (26.5%, 13/49); however, the accuracy of both groups tended to be higher than that of conventional US. The overestimation rate of CEUS (42.9%, 21/49) and DCE-MRI (40.8%, 20/49) was significantly higher than that of conventional US (18.4%, 9/49) (P=0.001 and P=0.015, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: CEUS and DCE-MRI show similar performance when evaluating the size of breast cancer. However, CEUS is more convenient, has a shorter operation time, and has fewer restrictions on its use. Notably, conventional US is more prone to underestimate the size of lesions, whereas CEUS and DCE-MRI are more prone to overestimate the size.
引用
收藏
页码:157 / 168
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Imaging of Carotid Plaque Neovascularization by Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging
    Cattaneo, Mattia
    Sun, Jie
    Staub, Daniel
    Xu, Dongxiang
    Gallino, Jeanne Marie
    Santini, Paolo
    Porretta, Alessandra P.
    Yuan, Chun
    Balu, Niranjan
    Arnold, Marcel
    Froio, Alberto
    Limoni, Costanzo
    Wyttenbach, Rolf
    Gallino, Augusto
    [J]. CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASES, 2019, 48 (3-6) : 140 - 148
  • [2] Three-dimensional Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound in Response Assessment for Breast Cancer: A Comparison with Dynamic Contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Pathology
    Jia, Wan-Ru
    Tang, Lei
    Wang, Deng-Bin
    Chai, Wei-Min
    Fei, Xiao-Chun
    He, Jian-Rong
    Chen, Man
    Wang, Wen-Ping
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2016, 6
  • [3] Three-dimensional Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound in Response Assessment for Breast Cancer: A Comparison with Dynamic Contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Pathology
    Wan-Ru Jia
    Lei Tang
    Deng-Bin Wang
    Wei-Min Chai
    Xiao-Chun Fei
    Jian-Rong He
    Man Chen
    Wen-Ping Wang
    [J]. Scientific Reports, 6
  • [4] A direct comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection and prediction of aggressiveness
    Alexander D. J. Baur
    Julia Schwabe
    Julian Rogasch
    Andreas Maxeiner
    Tobias Penzkofer
    Carsten Stephan
    Marc Rudl
    Bernd Hamm
    Ernst-Michael Jung
    Thom Fischer
    [J]. European Radiology, 2018, 28 : 1949 - 1960
  • [5] A direct comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection and prediction of aggressiveness
    Baur, Alexander D. J.
    Schwabe, Julia
    Rogasch, Julian
    Maxeiner, Andreas
    Penzkofer, Tobias
    Stephan, Carsten
    Rudl, Marc
    Hamm, Bernd
    Jung, Ernst-Michael
    Fischer, Thom
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2018, 28 (05) : 1949 - 1960
  • [6] Intestinal perfusion measurements with contrast-enhanced ultrasound and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging enterography: A comparison study
    Wilkens, R.
    Peters, D. A.
    Nielsen, A. H.
    Hovgaard, V. P.
    Glerup, H.
    Krogh, K.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CROHNS & COLITIS, 2016, 10 : S164 - S165
  • [7] Dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging of the breast with magnetic resonance
    Cron, GO
    Santyr, G
    Kelcz, F
    [J]. IMTC/97 - IEEE INSTRUMENTATION & MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE: SENSING, PROCESSING, NETWORKING, PROCEEDINGS VOLS 1 AND 2, 1997, : 1354 - 1356
  • [8] Carotid plaque neovascularization - Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance blinded comparison
    Cattaneo, M.
    Sun, J.
    Staub, D.
    Xu, D.
    Gallino, J. M.
    Santini, P.
    Porretta, A. P.
    Yuan, C.
    Niranjan, B.
    Arnold, M.
    Limoni, C.
    Gallino, A.
    Cattaneo, M.
    [J]. CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASES, 2017, 43
  • [9] Breast tumor size assessment: Comparison of conventional ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound
    Jiang, Yu-Xin
    Liu, He
    Liu, Ji-Bin
    Zhu, Qing-Li
    Sun, Qiang
    Chang, Xiao-Yan
    [J]. ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2007, 33 (12): : 1873 - 1881
  • [10] Accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Compared With Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Assessing the Tumor Response After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer
    Lee, Sandy C.
    Grant, Edward
    Sheth, Pulin
    Garcia, Agustin A.
    Desai, Bhushan
    Ji, Lingyun
    Groshen, Susan
    Hwang, Darryl
    Yamashita, Mary
    Hovanessian-Larsen, Linda
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE, 2017, 36 (05) : 901 - 911