The clinical value of Arrival-time Parametric Imaging using contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions

Utilizing multimodal ultrasonography in conjunction with serum Ki-67 and HER2 tests for breast cancer detection and prognosis

ObjectiveTo examine the diagnostic and prognostic value of multimodal ultrasound and serum human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and Ki-67 antigen (Ki-67) testing for breast cancer.MethodsWe enrolled 65 patients with breast cancer admitted to the Tianjin Fourth Centre Hospital between March 2018 and March 2019 as the study group, while the control group consisted of 65 patients with benign breast nodules admitted during the same time period. All cases underwent ultrasound elastography (UE), contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS), serum examination, and Ki-67 and HER2 testing to determine the differences in multimodal ultrasound parameters and biomarkers, respectively, between the two groups and their relationship to the pathological features of breast cancer; ROC curves were generated to determine the accuracy of the combined examination in predicting breast cancer prognosis.ResultsThe study group had significantly higher UE score and CEUS-PI, significantly lower time to peak (TTP) and mean transit time (MTT) levels than the control group (P < 0.001), and significantly higher serum HER2 and tumor tissue Ki-67 expression (P < 0.05).ConclusionIt is possible to improve the breast cancer diagnosis rate by using multimodal ultrasound in conjunction with serum Ki-67 and HER2 testing.

Predictive value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography and ultrasound elastography for management of BI-RADS category 4 nonpalpable breast masses

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to investigate the independent risk factors and associated predictive values of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), shear wave elastography (SWE), and strain elastography (SE) for high-risk lesions (HRL) and malignant tumors (MT) among nonpalpable breast masses classified as BI-RADS category 4 on conventional ultrasound.

METHODS

This prospective study involved consecutively admitted patients with breast tumors from January 2018, aiming to explore the management of BI-RADS category 4 breast tumors using CEUS and elastography. We conducted a retrospective review of patient data, focusing on those with a history of a nonpalpable mass as the primary complaint. Pathologic findings after surgical resection served as the gold standard. The CEUS arterial-phase indices were analyzed using contrast agent arrival-time parametric imaging processing mode, while quantitative and qualitative indices were examined on ES images. Independent risk factors were identified through binary logistic regression multifactorial analysis. The predictive efficacy of different modalities was compared using a receiver operating characteristics curve. Subsequently, a nomogram for predicting the risk of HRL/MT was established based on a multifactorial logistic regression model.

RESULTS

A total of 146 breast masses from 146 patients were included, comprising 80 benign tumors, 12 HRLs, and 54 MTs based on the final pathology. There was no significant difference in pathologic size between the benign and HRL/MT groups [8.00(6.25,10.00) vs. 9.00(6.00,10.00), P = 0.506]. The diagnostic efficacy of US plus CEUS exceeded that of US plus SWE/SE for BI-RADS 4 nonpalpable masses, with an AUC of 0.954 compared to 0.798/0.741 (P ＜ 0.001). Further stratified analysis revealed a more pronounced improvement for reclassification of BI-RADS 4a masses (AUC: 0.943 vs. 0.762/0.675, P ＜ 0.001) than BI-RADS 4b (AUC:0.950 vs. 0.885/0.796, P＞0.05) with the assistance of CEUS than SWE/SE. Employing downgrade CEUS strategies resulted in negative predictive values ranging from 95.2 % to 100.0 % for BI-RADS 4a and 4b masses. Conversely, using upgrade nomogram strategies, which included the independent predictive risk factors of irregular enhanced shape, poor defined enhanced margin, earlier enhanced time, increased surrounding vessels, and presence of contrast agent retention, the diagnostic performance achieved an AUC of 0.947 with good calibration.

CONCLUSION

After investigating the potential of CEUS and ES in improving risk assessment and diagnostic accuracy for nonpalpable BI-RADS category 4 breast masses, it is evident that CEUS has a more significant impact on enhancing classification compared to ES, particularly for BI-RADS 4a subgroup masses. This finding suggests that CEUS may offer greater benefits in improving risk assessment and diagnostic accuracy for this specific subgroup of breast masses.

Added value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound to conventional ultrasound for characterization of indeterminate soft-tissue tumors

OBJECTIVE

To assess the added value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) to conventional ultrasound in differentiating benign soft-tissue tumors from malignant ones.

METHODS

197 soft-tissue tumors underwent ultrasound examination with confirmed histopathology were retrospectively evaluated. The radiologists classified all the tumors as benign, malignant, or indeterminate according to ultrasound features. The indeterminate tumors underwent CEUS were reviewed afterwards for malignancy identification by using individual and combined CEUS features.

RESULTS

Ultrasound analysis classified 62 soft-tissue tumors as benign, 111 tumors as indeterminate and 24 tumors as malignant. There 104 indeterminate tumors were subject to CEUS. Three CEUS features including enlargement of enhancement area, infiltrative enhancement boundary, and intratumoral arrival time difference were significantly associated with the tumor nature in both univariable and multivariable analysis for the indeterminate tumors (all p < 0.05). When at least one out of the three discriminant CEUS features were present, the best sensitivity of 100% for malignancy identification was obtained with the specificity of 66.7% and the AUC of 0.833. When at least two of the three discriminant CEUS features were present, the best area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.924 for malignancy identification was obtained. The combination of at least two discriminant CEUS features showed much better diagnostic performance than the optimal combination of ultrasound features in terms of AUC (0.924 vs 0.608, p < 0.0001), sensitivity (94.0% vs 42.0%, p < 0.0001), and specificity (90.7% vs 79.6%, p = 0.210) for the indeterminate tumors.

CONCLUSION

The combination CEUS features of enlargement of enhancement area, infiltrative enhancement boundary and intratumoral arrival time difference are valuable to improve the discriminating performance for indeterminate soft-tissue tumors on conventional ultrasound.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

The combination of peritumoral and arrival-time CEUS features can improve the discriminating performance for indeterminate soft-tissue tumors on conventional ultrasound.

Differentiation Between Granulomatous Lobular Mastitis and Breast Cancer Using Quantitative Parameters on Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound

Objective

To investigate the Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) imaging characteristics of granulomatous lobular mastitis (GLM) and the value of differentiating GLM from breast cancer.

Materials and methods

The study included 30 women with GLM (mean age 36.7 ± 5 years [SD]) and 58 women with breast cancer (mean age 48. ± 8 years [SD]) who were scheduled for ultrasound-guided tissue biopsy. All patients were evaluated with conventional US and CEUS prior to the biopsy. In both groups, the parameters of the quantitative and qualitative analysis of the CEUS were recorded and compared. The receiver-operating-characteristics curves (ROC) were created. Sensitivity, specificity, cut-off, and area under the curve (AUC) values were calculated.

Results

TTP values in GLM were statistically higher than in breast cancer (mean, 27.63 ± 7.29 vs. 20.10 ± 6.11), but WIS values were lower (mean, 0.16 ± 0.05 vs. 0.28 ± 0.17). Rich vascularity was discovered in 54.45% of breast cancer patients, but only 30.00% of GLM patients had rich vascularity. The AUC for the ROC test was 0.791 and 0.807, respectively. The optimal cut-off value for TTP was 24.5s, and the WIS cut-off value was 0.185dB/s, yielding 73.33% sensitivity, 84.48% specificity, and 86.21% sensitivity, 70% specificity respectively in the diagnosis of GLM. The lesion scores reduced from 4 to 3 with the addition of CEUS for the patients with GLM. However, the scores did not change for the patients with breast cancer.

Conclusion

CEUS could help distinguish GLM from breast cancer by detecting higher TTP and WIS values, potentially influencing clinical decision-making for additional biopsies.

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

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.

The value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the diagnosis of BI-RADS-US 4a lesions less than 2 cm in diameter

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most common malignant tumor in women. Early diagnosis of benign and malignant breast tumors is of great significance. OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively analyze the value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in the diagnosis of Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4a breast lesions less than 2 cm in diameter. METHODS: CEUS was performed for 143 breast masses less than 2 cm in diameter that were diagnosed as BI-RADS 4a by ultrasound and reclassified. Considering pathological diagnosis as the gold standard, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of reclassified lesions after CEUS for the diagnosis of benign and malignant masses were analyzed. RESULTS: BI-RADS 4a breast masses with a diameter less than 2 cm (n = 143) were confirmed by pathology; 103 and 40 were classified as benign and malignant, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of CEUS for the diagnosis were 90%, 86%, 72%, and 95%, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of CEUS for the diagnosis of benign and malignant tumors after CEUS was 0.904. CONCLUSION: CEUS can help to improve the diagnostic accuracy of BI-RADS 4a masses with a diameter less than 2 cm.

The diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and superb microvascular imaging in differentiating benign from malignant solid breast lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the added value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and superb microvascular imaging (SMI) to the conventional ultrasound (US) in the diagnosis of breast lesions.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Chinese national knowledge infrastructure databases, Chinese biomedical literature databases, and Wanfang were searched for relevant studies from November 2015 to November 2021. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Studies (QUADAS) tool. Meta-Disc version 1.4 was used to calculate sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE), positive likelihood ratio (LR +), negative likelihood ratio (LR-), area under curve (AUC), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Meta-regression analysis was performed using STATA 16.0 software to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the two techniques.

RESULTS

In the five studies included, 530 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis. For SMI, the pooled SEN and SPE were 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69-0.91) and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.83-0.91), respectively, LR + was 5.75 (95% CI: 4.26-7.78), LR- was 0.29 (95% CI: 0.23-0.36), DOR was 21.42 (95% CI, 13.61-33.73), and AUC was 0.8871. For CEUS, the pooled SEN and SPE were 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82-0.91) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82-0.89), respectively, LR + was 5.92 (95% CI: 4.21-8.33), LR- was 0.16 (95% CI: 0.11-0.25), DOR was 38.27 (95% CI: 18.73-78.17), and AUC was 0.9210.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding CEUS and (or) SMI to conventional US could improve its diagnostic performance in differentiating benign from malignant solid breast lesions.

Comparison of skin sensitivity following breast reconstruction with three different techniques: Autologous fat grafting, DIEP flap and expander/implant1

BACKGROUND

Autologous fat grafting (AFG) has been established over the past two decades as an additive technique during and after breast reconstruction. Complete reconstruction of the breast mound with AFG alone represents an exceptional technique that has been published mostly in case reports or in studies with limited cases.The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of three different techniques for breast reconstruction on the recovery of skin sensitivity at the reconstructed breast.

METHODS

The study included 30 patients after mastectomy following breast cancer. Three groups were examined: A) breast reconstruction by autologous fat grafting (AFG), B) breast reconstruction by deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap (DIEP) and C) breast reconstruction by expander/implant (TE).Biometric data were compared; sensitivity tests were performed using Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments.The non-operated, healthy contralateral breasts of the patients were used as a reference.

RESULTS

While the traditional reconstruction techniques by microsurgical anastomosed perforator flap or expander/implant showed a strongly decreased or completely missing sensitivity of the skin, the tests after reconstruction by AFG represented high values of sensory recovery, which came close to the reference group of non-operated breasts.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare skin sensitivity after AFG-based reconstruction to established techniques for breast reconstruction. We could demonstrate in a limited group of patients, that breast reconstruction by autologous fat grafting can achieve higher values of skin sensitivity compared to traditional techniques.

Quantification of dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in non-cystic breast lesions using external perfusion software

The aim of this present clinical pilot study is the display of typical perfusion results in patients with solid, non-cystic breast lesions. The lesions were characterized using contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with (i) time intensity curve analyses (TIC) and (ii) parametric color maps. The 24 asymptomatic patients included were genetically tested for having an elevated risk for breast cancer. At a center of early detection of familial ovary and breast cancer, those patients received annual MRI and grey-scale ultrasound. If lesions remained unclear or appeared even suspicious, those patients also received CEUS. CEUS was performed after intravenous application of sulfur hexafluoride microbubbles. Digital DICOM cine loops were continuously stored for one minute in PACS (picture archiving and communication system). Perfusion images and TIC analyses were calculated off-line with external perfusion software (VueBox). The lesion diameter ranged between 7 and 15 mm (mean 11 ± 3 mm). Five hypoechoic irregular lesions were scars, 6 lesions were benign and 12 lesions were highly suspicious for breast cancer with irregular enhancement at the margins and a partial wash out. In those 12 cases, histopathology confirmed breast cancer. All the suspicious lesions were correctly identified visually. For the perfusion analysis only Peak Enhancement (PE) and Area Under the Curve (AUC) added more information for correctly identifying the lesions. Typical for benign lesions is a prolonged contrast agent enhancement with lower PE and prolonged wash out, while scars are characterized typically by a reduced enhancement in the center. No differences (p = 0.428) were found in PE in the center of benign lesions (64.2 ± 28.9 dB), malignant lesions (88.1 ± 93.6 dB) and a scar (40.0 ± 17.0 dB). No significant differences (p = 0.174) were found for PE values at the margin of benign lesions (96.4 ± 144.9 dB), malignant lesions (54.3 ± 86.2 dB) or scar tissue (203.8 ± 218.9 dB). Significant differences (p < 0.001) were found in PE of the surrounding tissue when comparing benign lesions (33.6 ± 25.2 dB) to malignant lesions (15.7 ± 36.3 dB) and scars (277.2 ± 199.9 dB). No differences (p = 0.821) were found in AUC in the center of benign lesions (391.3 ± 213.7), malignant lesions (314.7 ± 643.9) and a scar (213.1 ± 124.5). No differences (p = 0.601) were found in AUC values of the margin of benign lesions (313.3 ± 372.8), malignant lesions (272.6 ± 566.4) or scar tissue (695.0 ± 360.6). Significant differences (p < 0.01) were found in AUC of the surrounding tissue for benign lesions (151.7 ± 127.8), malignant lesions (177.9 ± 1345.6) and scars (1091 ± 693.3). There were no differences in perfusion evaluation for mean transit time (mTT), rise time (RT) and time to peak (TTP) when comparing the center to the margins and the surrounding tissue. The CEUS perfusion parameters PE and AUC allow a very good assessment of the risk of malignant breast lesions and thus a downgrading of BI-RADS 4 lesions. The use of the external perfusion software (VueBox, Bracco, Milan, Italy) did not lead to any further improvement in the diagnosis of suspicious breast lesions and does appears not to have any additional diagnostic value in breast lesions.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and perfusion imaging using VueBox®

The external perfusion software (VueBox™) for contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), enables the quantitative analysis of micro-vascularization within non-cystic lesions in terms of characterization and detection. This review summarizes our work about parathyroid gland, thyroid gland, liver, prostate and other tissues as well as original studies in the use of parametric perfusion imaging. Useful perfusion parameters are introduced.

Conventional and contrast-enhanced ultrasound features in sclerosing adenosis and correlation with pathology

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of conventional ultrasound (US) and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in differential diagnosis of sclerosing adenosis (SA) from malignance and investigate the correlated features with pathology.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 103 pathologically confirmed SA. All lesions were evaluated with conventional US while 31 lesions with CEUS. Lesions were divided into SA with or without benign lesions (Group 1, n = 81) and SA with malignancy (Group 2, n = 22). Performance of two methods were analyzed. The ultrasonographic characteristics were compared between two groups with Student's t-test for measurement and chi-squared or Fisher's exact test for count data.

RESULTS

There were 22 lesions complicated with malignancy, and the mean age of Group 2 was higher than Group 1 (55.27 vs. 41.57, p < 0.001). The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of conventional US and CEUS were 95.45%, 46.91%, 57.28% and 100%, 62.5%, 70.97%. Angularity (p < 0.001), spicules (p = 0.023), calcification (p = 0.026) and enlarged scope (p = 0.012) or crab claw-like enhancement (p = 0.008) in CEUS were more frequent detected in SA with malignancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Though CEUS showed an improved accuracy, the performance of ultrasound in the diagnosis of SA was limited. Awareness and careful review of the histopathologically related imaging features can be helpful in the diagnosis of SA.

Value of multimodality imaging in the diagnosis of breast lesions with calcification: A retrospective study

PURPOSE

To assess the value of conventional ultrasound (US), contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and mammography in the diagnosis of breast lesions with calcifications.

METHODS

A total of 87 breast lesions with calcification were subjected to US, CEUS and mammography and divided into 3 groups: Group A (all cases), Group A1 (31 cases who underwent US and CEUS first followed by mammography), and Group A2 (56 cases who underwent mammography first followed by US and CEUS). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of different methods in different groups.

RESULTS

In Group A, the area under the ROC curve (AUROC) of CEUS were 0.937, which were significantly higher than that of mammography (p < 0.05). In Group A1, the AUROC of CEUS were 0.842, which were not significantly different from that of US and mammography (p > 0.05). In Group A2, the AUROC of CEUS were 0.987, which were significantly higher than that of mammography and US (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Based on the mammography results, the combination of US and CEUS might improve the diagnostic efficacy in breast lesions with calcification.