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

A risk prediction stratification for non-mass breast lesions, combining clinical characteristics and imaging features on ultrasound, mammography, and MRI

Objectives

Given the inevitable trend of domestic imaging center mergers and the current lack of comprehensive imaging evaluation guidelines for non-mass breast lesions, we have developed a novel BI-RADS risk prediction and stratification system for non-mass breast lesions that integrates clinical characteristics with imaging features from ultrasound, mammography, and MRI, with the aim of assisting clinicians in interpreting imaging reports.

Methods

This study enrolled 350 patients with non-mass breast lesions (NMLs), randomly assigning them to a training set of 245 cases (70%) and a test set of 105 cases (30%). Radiologists conducted comprehensive evaluations of the lesions using ultrasound, mammography, and MRI. Independent predictors were identified using LASSO logistic regression, and a predictive risk model was constructed using a nomogram generated with R software, with subsequent validation in both sets.

Results

LASSO logistic regression identified a set of independent predictors, encompassing age, clinical palpation hardness, distribution and morphology of calcifications, peripheral blood supply as depicted by color Doppler imaging, maximum lesion diameter, patterns of internal enhancement, distribution of non-mass lesions, time-intensity curve (TIC), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values. The predictive model achieved area under the curve (AUC) values of 0.873 for the training group and 0.877 for the testing group. The model's positive predictive values were as follows: BI-RADS 2 = 0%, BI-RADS 3 = 0%, BI-RADS 4A = 6.25%, BI-RADS 4B = 26.13%, BI-RADS 4C = 80.84%, and BI-RADS 5 = 97.33%.

Conclusion

The creation of a risk-predictive BI-RADS stratification, specifically designed for non-mass breast lesions and integrating clinical and imaging data from multiple modalities, significantly enhances the precision of diagnostic categorization for these lesions.

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.

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.

The diagnostic performance of shear wave velocity ratio for the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions: Compared with VTQ, and mammography

PURPOSE

To evaluate the diagnostic value of shear wave velocity (SWV) ratio for the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Our retrospective study included 151 breast lesions that were diagnosed by biopsy and surgical pathology. All of the breast lesions were detected by conventional ultrasound and Virtual Touch tissue quantification (VTQ) and mammography. The sonographic characteristics of the breast lesion, such as the internal echo, shape, margin, color flow, and calcification so on, were also observed. The SWV in lesions and surrounding parenchyma were measured and the SWV ratio between the lesion and surrounding parenchyma was calculated. Pathological results were used as a diagnosis standard to compare the value of SWV ratio, VTQ, and mammography in the diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions.

RESULTS

The 151 breast lesions included 96 benign lesions and 55 malignant lesions. The cutoff value of VTQ in the diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions was 5.01 m/s, of SWV ratio was 2.43, and mammography was BI-RADS 4B. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the SWV ratio were 78.2%, 86.5%, 83.4%, and 0.83 respectively. While of SWV ratio with mammography was 86.4%, 89.4%, 88.3% and 0.87, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and AUC of SWV ratio and SWV ratio with mammography were statistically higher than those of mammography, no statistically higher than VTQ and VTQ with mammography.

CONCLUSION

The SWV ratio can improve the sensitivity without sacrificing diagnostic specificity in the process of breast cancer diagnostic, provide a better diagnostic performance, and avoid unnecessary biopsy or surgery.