Differentiate diagnostic value of strain elastography technology for breast BI-RADS 4A type nodules
XING Boyuan DONG Meng FU Chenghui LI Xingzi ZHANG Bingyi
1.Third-grade Pharmacological Laboratory on Traditional Chinese Medicine, State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine, the First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University Yichang Central People’s Hospital, Hubei Province, Yichang 443002, China
Abstract：Objective To investigate the differential diagnostic value of strain elastography technology for breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) 4A type nodules, in order to reduce unnecessary surgery or puncture biopsy. Methods The clinical and elastography data of 237 patients with BI-RADS 4A type nodules diagnosed and treated in Yichang Central People’s Hospital, Hubei Province from May 2021 to May 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. With the pathological results as the gold standard, the clinical and ultrasound imaging characteristics of benign and malignant BI-RADS 4A type nodules were compared; the receiver operating characteristic curve was drawn to obtain the optimal threshold value of elastic strain rate ratio method for the diagnosis of benign and malignant breast gland nodules, and the BI-RADS classification of nodules was adjusted according to the elastography technology; the diagnostic efficacy and consistency results between elastic scoring method and strain rate ratio method for BI-RADS 4A type nodules was compared. Results Among 237 BI-RADS 4A type nodules, 214 were benign and 23 were malignant. There were statistically significant differences in age, elasticity score, and strain rate ratio between benign and malignant nodules (P＜0.05); there were no significant differences in the maximum diameter, shape, orientation, edge, internal echo, posterior echo, and microcalcification between benign and malignant nodules (P＞0.05). The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the elastic score method were 60.87%, 97.20%, 93.67%, 70.00%, and 95.85%, respectively; Kappa value was 0.617, consistent with high. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the elastic ratio method were 73.91%, 81.31%, 80.59%, 29.82%, and 96.67%, respectively; Kappa value was 0.333, showing poor consistency. Conclusion Strain elastography technology has certain value in differential diagnostic benign and malignant BI-RADS 4A nodules, and can reduce unnecessary puncture biopsy.
[1] Sung H，Ferlay J，Siegel RL，et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020：GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries [J]. CA Cancer J Clin，2021，71（3）：209-249. [2] 何思怡，李贺，曹毛毛，等.全球及我国女性乳腺癌疾病负担年龄分布及变化趋势[J].中国肿瘤，2023，32（1）：1-7. [3] 赫捷，陈万青，李霓，等.中国女性乳腺癌筛查与早诊早治指南（2021，北京）[J].中国肿瘤，2021，30（3）：161-191. [4] Siegel RL，Miller KD，Jemal A. Cancer Statistics，2020 [J]. CA Cancer J Clin，2020，70（1）：7-30. [5] He P，Cui L，Chen W，et al. subcategorzation of ultrasnographic B-RADS category 4：assessment of diagnosic accuracy in diagnosing breast esions and infuence of cinical factors on positive predictive value [J]. Ultrasound Med Biol，2019，45（5）：1253-1258. [6] Stavros AT，Freitas AG，deMello GGN，et al. Ultrasound posi- tive predictive values by BI-RADS categories 3-5 for solid masses：An independent reader study [J]. Eur Radiol，2017， 27（10）：4307-4315. [7] Jia W，Luo T，Dong Y，et al. Breast Elasticity Imaging Techniques：Comparison of Strain Elastography and Shear-Wave Elastography in the Same Population [J]. Ultrasound Med Biol，2021，47（1）：104-113. [8] 江姗姗，刘表虎，刘超美，等.超声弹性成像评分法联合面积比法在BI-RADS4类乳腺肿块诊断中的价值[J].皖南医学院学报，2020，39（5）：473-475，486. [9] D’orsi CJ，Sickles EA，Mendelson EB，et al. ACR BI-RADS atlas，breast imaging reporting and data system. 5th ed [M]. Reston：American College of Radiology，2013：123-132. [10] Shia WC，Hsu FR，Dai ST，et al. Semantic Segmentation of the Malignant Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Lex- icon on Breast Ultrasound Images by Using DeepLab v3 [J]. Sensors（Basel），2022，22（14）：5352. [11] 中国抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会.中国抗癌协会乳腺癌诊治指南与规范（2021年版）[J].中国癌症杂志，2021， 31（10）：954-1040. [12] Itoh A，Ueno E，Tohno E，et al. Breast disease：clinical app- lication of US elastography for diagnosis [J]. Radiology，2006， 239（2）：341-350. [13] Choe J，Chikarmane SA，Giess CS. Nonmass findings at breast US：definition，classifications，and differential diagnosis [J]. Radiographics，2020，40（2）：326-335. [14] 孙杨，林子梅，骆洁丽，等.超声BI-RADS分类对特殊类型乳腺癌的诊断价值[J].中华超声影像学杂志，2022， 31（1）：37-42. [15] Eghtedari M，Chong A，Rakow-Penner R，et al. Current Status and Future of BI-RADS in Multimodality Imaging，From the AJR Special Series on Radiology Reporting and Data Systems [J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol，2021，216（4）：860- 873. [16] Ranjkesh M，Hajibonabi F，Seifar F，et al. Diagnostic Value of Elastography，Strain Ratio，and Elasticity to B -Mode Ratio and Color Doppler Ultrasonography in Breast Lesions [J]. Int J Gen Med，2020，13：215-224. [17] 邢博缘，刘小慧，赵云，等.超声弹性成像联合乳腺影像报告和数据系统（BI-RADS）分类诊断非肿块型乳腺癌[J].中国医学影像技术，2021，37（8）：1154-1157. [18] Shang J，Ruan LT，Wang YY，et al. Utilizing size-based thresholds of stiffness gradient to reclassify BI-RADS category 3-4b lesions increases diagnostic performance [J]. Clin Radiol，2019，74（4）：306-313. [19] 董梦，张秉宜，邢博缘.超声弹性成像技术在乳腺疾病中的应用进展[J].中国医药导报，2022，19（22）：42-45， 61. [20] Mutala TM，Mwango GN，Aywak A，et al. Determining the elastography strain ratio cut off value for differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions：systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Cancer Imaging，2022，22（1）：12. [21] Kokubu Y，Yamada K，Tanabe M，et al. Evaluating the usefulness of breast strain elastography for intraductal lesions [J]. J Med Ultrason（2001），2021，48（1）：63-70. [22] 邢博缘.超声S-Detect技术联合弹性成像对乳腺良恶性结节的诊断价值[D].宜昌：三峡大学，2021. [23] 闫雷，戚庭月，程莲，等.声触诊组织成像定量参数联合年龄调整乳腺BI-RADS 4a类结节评级的价值[J].中国医学影像学杂志，2021，29（1）：42-46. [24] 张淑平，青春，韩敏，等.乳腺原发性腺样囊性癌的影像学表现[J].中国肿瘤临床，2019，46（13）：661-664. [25] 张和庆，彭玉兰.乳腺腺样囊性癌的超声图像特征分析[J].临床超声医学杂志，2017，19（9）：625-627. [26] 杨浩，陶璇，施颉，等.经直肠前列腺超声造影与实时弹性成像对前列腺良恶性疾病的诊断价值[J].中国当代医药，2022，29（20）：130-134.
2023, Vol. 20 
京公网安备 11010502046598号