Startseite Differentiating solid breast masses: comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of shear wave elastography and magnetic resonance imaging
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Differentiating solid breast masses: comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of shear wave elastography and magnetic resonance imaging

  • Maryam Farghadani , Rozbeh Barikbin , Mostafa Haji Rezaei , Ali Hekmatnia , Marzieh Aalinezhad EMAIL logo und Hosein Zare
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 5. Oktober 2020
Diagnosis
Aus der Zeitschrift Diagnosis Band 8 Heft 3

Abstract

Objectives

Shear wave elastography (SWE) quantitatively determines the nature of the breast lesions. Few previous studies have compared the diagnostic value of this modality with other imaging techniques. The present study aimed to compare the diagnostic value of SWE with that of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detecting the nature of the breast masses.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, 80 patients with breast lumps who had Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) score of three or higher based on mammography and/or screening ultrasonography, underwent 3D SWE and MRI. The lesions were classified according to MRI BI-RADS scoring; Mean elasticity (Emean) and elasticity ratio (Eratio) for each lesion were also determined by SWE. The results of these two modalities were compared with histopathologic diagnosis as the gold standard method; diagnostic value and diagnostic agreement were then calculated.

Results

Of the masses, 46.2% were histopathologically proven to be malignant. The Emean for benign and malignant masses was 34.04 ± 19.51 kPa and 161.92 ± 58.14 kPa, respectively. Both modalities had diagnostic agreement with histopathologic results (p<0.001). Kappa coefficient was 0.87 for SWE and 0.42 for MRI. The sensitivity of both methods was 94.59% (95% CI: 81.81–99.34), while the specificity and accuracy were 48.84% [95% CI: 33.31–64.54] and 70.0% [95% CI: 58.72–79.74] for MRI, and 93.02% [95% CI: 80.94–98.54] and 93.75% [95% CI: 86.01–97.94] for SWE.

Conclusions

SWE has better diagnostic value in terms of determining the nature of the breast masses. SWE can increase the diagnostic function of differentiating benign masses from malignant ones.

Keywords: breast mass; diagnostic index; magnetic resonance imaging; shear wave elastography
Corresponding author: Marzieh Aalinezhad, Department of Radiology, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran, Phone: +98 3136255555, Fax: +98 3136692174, Mobile: +98 9132888457, E-mail:

  1. Research funding: Deputy of Research, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences.

  2. Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.

  3. Competing interests: Authors state no conflict of interest.

  4. Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained from all individuals included in this study.

  5. Ethical approval: All stages of the design and implementation of this study were monitored and approved by the Ethics Committee of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. All ethical codes related to the studies on a human sample were observed throughout the study.

References

1. Rakha, EA, Badve, S, Eusebi, V, Reis-Filho, JS, Fox, SB, Dabbs, DJ, et al. Breast lesions of uncertain malignant nature and limited metastatic potential: proposals to improve their recognition and clinical management. Histopathology 2016;68:45–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.12861.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

2. Moschetta, M, Telegrafo, M, Carluccio, DA, Jablonska, JP, Rella, L, Serio, G, et al. Comparison between fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) and core needle biopsy (CNB) in the diagnosis of breast lesions. G Chir 2014;35:171–6.10.11138/gchir/2014.35.7.171Suche in Google Scholar

3. Willems, SM, Van Deurzen, CH, Van Diest, PJ. Diagnosis of breast lesions: fine-needle aspiration cytology or core needle biopsy? A review. J Clin Pathol 2012;65:287–92. https://doi.org/10.1136/jclinpath-2011-200410.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

4. Garcia-Vilanova-Comas, A, Fuster-Diana, C, Cubells-Parrilla, M, Perez-Ferriols, MD, Perez-Valles, A, Roig-Vila, JV. Nicolau syndrome after lidocaine injection and cold application: a rare complication of breast core needle biopsy. Int J Dermatol 2011;50:78–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-4632.2009.04446.x.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

5. Mathenge, EG, Dean, CA, Clements, D, Vaghar-Kashani, A, Photopoulos, S, Coyle, KM, et al. Core needle biopsy of breast cancer tumors increases distant metastases in a mouse model. Neoplasia 2014;16:950–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neo.2014.09.004.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

6. Brenner, RJ, Gordon, LM. Malignant seeding following percutaneous breast biopsy: documentation with comprehensive imaging and clinical implications. Breast J 2011;17:651–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4741.2011.01156.x.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

7. Yerli, H, Yilmaz, T, Ural, B, Gulay, H. The diagnostic importance of evaluation of solid breast masses by sonoelastography. Ulus Cerrahi Derg 2013;29:67–71. https://doi.org/10.5152/ucd.2013.40.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

8. Lee, MV, Shaw, HL, Chi, T, Brazeal, HA, Holley, SO, Appleton, CM. Palpable breast abnormalities in women under age 40. Breast J 2018;24:798–805 https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.13035.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

9. Feig, SA. Screening mammography benefit controversies: sorting the evidence. Radiol Clin North Am 2014;52:455–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2014.02.009.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

10. Silva, J, Martinez-Velasco, A. Correlating MRI, mammogram, and ultrasonography (USG): which study most accurately predicts breast cancer size? J Clin Oncol 2009;27:e11549. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.27.15_suppl.e11549.Suche in Google Scholar

11. Kul, S, Cansu, A, Alhan, E, Dinc, H, Gunes, G, Reis, A. Contribution of diffusion-weighted imaging to dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the characterization of breast tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196:210–7. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.10.4258.Suche in Google Scholar

12. Pereira, FP, Martins, G, Figueiredo, E, Domingues, MN, Domingues, RC, Da Fonseca, LM, et al. Assessment of breast lesions with diffusion-weighted MRI: comparing the use of different b values. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:1030–5. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.09.2522.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

13. Min, Q, Shao, K, Zhai, L, Liu, W, Zhu, C, Yuan, L, et al. Differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast masses using diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. World J Surg Oncol 2015;13:32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-014-0431-3.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

14. Nouri-Neuville, M, De Rocquancourt, A, Cohen-Zarade, S, Chapellier-Canaud, M, Albiter, M, Hamy, AS, et al. Correlation between MRI and biopsies under second look ultrasound. Diagn Interv Imaging 2014;95:197–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2014.01.005.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

15. Stijven, S, Gielen, E, Bevernage, C, Horvath, M, Meylaerts, L. Magnetic resonance imaging: value of diffusion-weighted imaging in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2013;166:215–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.10.029.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

16. Feldmann, A, Langlois, C, Dewailly, M, Martinez, EF, Boulanger, L, Kerdraon, O, et al. Shear wave elastography (SWE): an analysis of breast lesion characterization in 83 breast lesions. Ultrasound Med Biol 2015;41:2594–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2015.05.019.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

17. Guo, X, Liu, Y, Li, W. Diagnostic accuracy of shear wave elastography for prediction of breast malignancy in patients with pathological nipple discharge. BMJ Open 2016;6:e008848. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008848.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

18. Balleyguier, C, Canale, S, Ben Hassen, W, Vielh, P, Bayou, EH, Mathieu, MC, et al. Breast elasticity: principles, technique, results: an update and overview of commercially available software. Eur J Radiol 2013;82:427–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.03.001.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

19. Kim, S, Choi, S, Choi, Y, Kook, SH, Park, HJ, Chung, EC. Diagnostic performance of shear wave elastography of the breast according to scanning orientation. J Ultrasound Med 2014;33:1797–804. https://doi.org/10.7863/ultra.33.10.1797.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

20. Evans, A, Whelehan, P, Thomson, K, Mclean, D, Brauer, K, Purdie, C, et al. Quantitative shear wave ultrasound elastography: initial experience in solid breast masses. Breast Canc Res 2010;12:R104. https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr2787.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

21. Chang, JM, Moon, WK, Cho, N, Yi, A, Koo, HR, Han, W, et al. Clinical application of shear wave elastography (SWE) in the diagnosis of benign and malignant breast diseases. Breast Canc Res Treat 2011;129:89–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1627-7.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

22. Youk, JH, Gweon, HM, Son, EJ, Chung, J, Kim, JA, Kim, EK. Three-dimensional shear-wave elastography for differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions: comparison with two-dimensional shear-wave elastography. Eur Radiol 2013;23:1519–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2736-3.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

23. Evans, A, Whelehan, P, Thomson, K, Brauer, K, Jordan, L, Purdie, C, et al. Differentiating benign from malignant solid breast masses: value of shear wave elastography according to lesion stiffness combined with greyscale ultrasound according to BI-RADS classification. Br J Canc 2012;107:224–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2012.253.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

24. Lee, EJ, Jung, HK, Ko, KH, Lee, JT, Yoon, JH. Diagnostic performances of shear wave elastography: which parameter to use in differential diagnosis of solid breast masses? Eur Radiol 2013;23:1803–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2782-5.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

25. Yoon, JH, Ko, KH, Jung, HK, Lee, JT. Qualitative pattern classification of shear wave elastography for breast masses: how it correlates to quantitative measurements. Eur J Radiol 2013;82:2199–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.08.047.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

26. Lee, SH, Chang, JM, Kim, WH, Bae, MS, Cho, N, Yi, A, et al. Differentiation of benign from malignant solid breast masses: comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional shear-wave elastography. Eur Radiol 2013;23:1015–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2686-9.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

27. Yoon, JH, Jung, HK, Lee, JT, Ko, KH. Shear-wave elastography in the diagnosis of solid breast masses: what leads to false-negative or false-positive results? Eur Radiol 2013;23:2432–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2854-6.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

28. Yu, Y, Xiao, Y, Cheng, J, Chiu, B. Breast lesion classification based on supersonic shear-wave elastography and automated lesion segmentation from B-mode ultrasound images. Comput Biol Med 2018;93:31–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2017.12.006.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

29. Au, FW, Ghai, S, Moshonov, H, Kahn, H, Brennan, C, Dua, H, et al. Diagnostic performance of quantitative shear wave elastography in the evaluation of solid breast masses: determination of the most discriminatory parameter. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014;203:W328–36. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.13.11693.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

30. Berg, WA, Cosgrove, DO, Dore, CJ, Schafer, FK, Svensson, WE, Hooley, RJ, et al. Shear-wave elastography improves the specificity of breast US: the BE1 multinational study of 939 masses. Radiology 2012;262:435–49. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11110640.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

31. Cheng, R, Li, J, Ji, L, Liu, H, Zhu, L. Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy between ultrasound elastography and magnetic resonance imaging for breast masses. Exp Ther Med 2018;15:2519–24.https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2017.5674.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

32. Morris, EA. Review of breast MRI: indications and limitations. Semin Roentgenol 2001;36:226–37. https://doi.org/10.1053/sroe.2001.25123.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

33. Weinstein, S, Rosen, M. Breast MR imaging: current indications and advanced imaging techniques. Radiol Clin North Am 2010;48:1013–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2010.06.011.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

34. Kimijima, I. Preoperative evaluation for intraductal spread of breast cancer through current imaging tests: their strengths and limitations. Breast Canc 2013;20:1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-012-0408-4.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2020-05-02
Accepted: 2020-08-24
Published Online: 2020-10-05
Published in Print: 2021-08-26

© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Chest pain management and biomarkers: the lack of trust in cardiac troponins measurement
  4. Reviews
  5. Bringing the clinical laboratory into the strategy to advance diagnostic excellence
  6. Atrial fibrillation: is there a role for cardiac troponin?
  7. Opinion Papers
  8. Towards better metainterpretation: improving the clinician’s interpretation of the radiology report
  9. The challenges of diagnosing diabetes in childhood
  10. Guidelines and Recommendations
  11. Measuring patient experience of diagnostic care and acceptability of testing
  12. Original Articles
  13. Clinical assessment of the Roche SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test
  14. Delayed treatment of bacteremia during the COVID-19 pandemic
  15. Strengths and weaknesses in the diagnostic process of endometriosis from the patients’ perspective: a focus group study
  16. Identifying trigger concepts to screen emergency department visits for diagnostic errors
  17. Handshake antimicrobial stewardship as a model to recognize and prevent diagnostic errors
  18. Uncertain diagnoses in a children’s hospital: patient characteristics and outcomes
  19. The effects of rudeness, experience, and perspective-taking on challenging premature closure after pediatric ICU physicians receive hand-off with the wrong diagnosis: a randomized controlled simulation trial
  20. Resident-faculty overnight discrepancy rates as a function of number of consecutive nights during a week of night float
  21. CONUT: a tool to assess nutritional status. First application in a primary care population
  22. Is there a real need for sputum culture for community-acquired pneumonia diagnostics? Results from a retrospective study in Russia
  23. Differentiating solid breast masses: comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of shear wave elastography and magnetic resonance imaging
  24. Short Communication
  25. Chest pain management: use of troponins in internal medicine wards
  26. Case Report
  27. Learning from tragedy – The Jessica Barnett story: challenges in the diagnosis of long QT syndrome
  28. Letters to the Editor
  29. Usability of non-medicinal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection to circumvent supply shortages
  30. Medical decision making during the COVID-19 epidemic: an opportunity to think how we think
https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2020-0056
Schlagwörter für diesen Artikel
breast mass; diagnostic index; magnetic resonance imaging; shear wave elastography

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Chest pain management and biomarkers: the lack of trust in cardiac troponins measurement
  4. Reviews
  5. Bringing the clinical laboratory into the strategy to advance diagnostic excellence
  6. Atrial fibrillation: is there a role for cardiac troponin?
  7. Opinion Papers
  8. Towards better metainterpretation: improving the clinician’s interpretation of the radiology report
  9. The challenges of diagnosing diabetes in childhood
  10. Guidelines and Recommendations
  11. Measuring patient experience of diagnostic care and acceptability of testing
  12. Original Articles
  13. Clinical assessment of the Roche SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test
  14. Delayed treatment of bacteremia during the COVID-19 pandemic
  15. Strengths and weaknesses in the diagnostic process of endometriosis from the patients’ perspective: a focus group study
  16. Identifying trigger concepts to screen emergency department visits for diagnostic errors
  17. Handshake antimicrobial stewardship as a model to recognize and prevent diagnostic errors
  18. Uncertain diagnoses in a children’s hospital: patient characteristics and outcomes
  19. The effects of rudeness, experience, and perspective-taking on challenging premature closure after pediatric ICU physicians receive hand-off with the wrong diagnosis: a randomized controlled simulation trial
  20. Resident-faculty overnight discrepancy rates as a function of number of consecutive nights during a week of night float
  21. CONUT: a tool to assess nutritional status. First application in a primary care population
  22. Is there a real need for sputum culture for community-acquired pneumonia diagnostics? Results from a retrospective study in Russia
  23. Differentiating solid breast masses: comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of shear wave elastography and magnetic resonance imaging
  24. Short Communication
  25. Chest pain management: use of troponins in internal medicine wards
  26. Case Report
  27. Learning from tragedy – The Jessica Barnett story: challenges in the diagnosis of long QT syndrome
  28. Letters to the Editor
  29. Usability of non-medicinal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 detection to circumvent supply shortages
  30. Medical decision making during the COVID-19 epidemic: an opportunity to think how we think
Jetzt anmelden und 20% sparen
Institutioneller Zugang
Wie funktioniert Authentifizierung?
Haben Sie eine Idee, wie wir unsere Website verbessern können?
Bitte schreiben Sie uns.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Heruntergeladen am 28.11.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/dx-2020-0056/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen