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.
HankinsonSE, PolyakK, GarberJE World Cancer Report. 2020.
2.
ChengM, TongW, LuoJ, LiM, LiangJ, PanF et alValue of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the diagnosis of breast US-BI-RADS 3 and 4 lesions with calcifications. CLIN RADIOL. 2020;75(12):934–941. doi:10.1016/j.crad.2020.07.017.
3.
DuY, WuY, ChenM, GuXApplication of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the diagnosis of small breast lesions. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2018;70(3):291–300. doi:10.3233/CH-170368.
4.
LiuH, JiangY, DaiQ, ZhuQ, WangL, ZhangJet al.
Differentiation of benign and malignant sub-1-cm breast lesions using contrast-enhanced sonography. J ULTRAS MED. 2015;34(1):117–23. doi:10.7863/ultra.34.1.117.
5.
ZhangY, SunX, LiJ, GaoQ, GuoX, LiuJX, GanW, YangS
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. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2022. doi: 10.3233/CH-211367. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35180108.
6.
JungEM, StroszczynskiC, JungFContrast enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) to detect abdominal microcirculatory disorders in severe cases of COVID-19 infection: First experience. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc74(4):353–361. doi:10.3233/CH-209003..
7.
KettenbachJ, HelbichTH, HuberS, ZunaI, DockWComputer-assisted quantitative assessment of power Doppler US: Effects of microbubble contrast agent in the differentiation of breast tumors. EUR J RADIOL. 2005;53(2):238–244. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2004.04.017.
8.
ZhaoH, XuR, OuyangQ, ChenL, DongB, HuihuaYContrast-enhanced ultrasound is helpful in the differentiation of malignant and benign breast lesions. EUR J RADIOL. 2010;73(2):288–293. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.05.043.
9.
RixA, PiepenbrockM, FlegeB, von StillfriedS, KoczeraP, OpacicT, et al. Effects of contrast-enhanced ultrasound treatment on neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Theranostics. 2021;11(19):9557–9570. doi:10.1016/j.crad.2020.07.017.
10.
XiaoX, JiangQ, WuH, GuanX, QinW, LuoBDiagnosis of sub-centimetre breast lesions: Combining BI-RADS-US with strain elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound— a preliminary study in China. EUR RADIOL201727(6):2443–2450. doi:10.1007/s00330-016-4628-4.
11.
EdgeSB, ByrdDR, ComptonCC, FritzAG, GreeneFL, TrottiA AJCC cancer staging manual. New York: Springer;2010.
12.
WangZ, ZhouQ, LiuJ, TangS, LiangX, ZhouZ, et al. Tumor size of breast invasive ductal cancer measured with contrast-enhanced ultrasound predicts regional lymph node metastasis and N stage. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2014;7(10) 6985–6991.
13.
AitkenE, OsmanMFactors affecting nodal status in invasive breast cancer: A retrospective analysis of 623 patients. The Breast Journal. 2010;16(3):271–278. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4741.2009.00897.x.
14.
CserniG, ChmielikE, CserniB, TotTThe new TNM-based staging of breast cancer. Virchows Arch.697-703. 2018;472(5):697–703. doi:10.1007/s00428-018-2301-9.
15.
TongW, ZhangX, LuoJ, PanF, LiangJ, HuangH, et al. Value of multimodality imaging in the diagnosis of breast lesions with calcification: A retrospective study. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2020;76(1):85–98. doi:10.3233/CH-200877.
16.
JungEM, JungF, StroszczynskiC, WiesingerIQuantification of dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in non-cystic breast lesions using external perfusion software. SCI REP-UK. 2021;11(1) . doi:10.1038/s41598-021-96137-6.
17.
CaproniN, MarchisioF, PecchiA, CanossiB, BattistaR, AlimonteD P, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the characterisation of breast masses: Utility of quantitative analysis in comparison with MRI. Eur Radiol. 2010;20(6):1384–1395. doi:10.1007/s00330-009-1690-1.
18.
MagnySJ, ShikhmanR, KeppkeAL Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2021.
19.
SedgwickEThe breast ultrasound lexicon: Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). Semin Roentgenol. 2011;46(4):245–251. doi:10.1053/j.ro.2011.04.001.
20.
LiangX, LiZ, ZhangL, WangD, TianJApplication of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the differential diagnosis of different molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Ultrasonic Imaging. 2020;42(6):261–270. doi:10.1177/0161734620959780.
21.
Cai Feng WanJDHFEnhancement patterns and parameters of breast cancers at contrast-enhanced US: Correlation with prognostic factors 1. Radiology. 2012;2(262):450–459. doi:10.1148/radiol.11110789/-/DC1.
22.
SaraccoA, AspelinP, LeiflandK, ThemudoR, WilczekB, AxelssonRBolus compared with continuous infusion of microbubble contrast agent using real-time contrast harmonic imaging ultrasound in breast tumors. Acta Radiol. 2009;50(8):854–859. doi:10.1080/02841850903085576.
23.
XiaoX, OuB, YangH, WuH, LuoB, ChenCBreast contrast-enhanced ultrasound: Is a scoring system feasible? A preliminary study in China. Plos One.e17. 2014;9(8):e105517. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0105517.
24.
ChenY, TangL, DuZ, ZhongZ, LuoJ, YangL, et al. Factors influencing the performance of a diagnostic model including contrast-enhanced ultrasound in breast lesions: Comparison with histopathology. Annals of Translational Medicine. 2019;7(22):647. doi:10.21037/atm.2019.10.83.
25.
LuJ, ZhouP, JinC, XuL, ZhuX, LianQ, et al. Diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography with sonoVue in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions: A meta-analysis. Technol Cancer Res T.66. 2020;19:1180566266. doi:10.1177/1533033820971583.
26.
DuJ, LiF, FangH, XiaJ, ZhuCMicrovascular architecture of breast lesions. J Ultras Med. 2008;27(6):833–842. doi:10.7863/jum.2008.27.6.833.
27.
LiuH, JiangY, LiuJ, ZhuQ, SunQEvaluation of breast lesions with contrast-enhanced ultrasound using the microvascular imaging technique: Initial observations. The Breast. 2008;17(5):532–539. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2008.04.004.
28.
SorelliPG, CosgroveDO, SvenssonWE, ZamanN, SatchithanandaK, BarrettNK, et al. Can contrast-enhanced sonography distinguish benign from malignant breast masses?J Clin Ultrasound. 2010;38(4):177–181. doi:10.1002/jcu.20671.
29.
WangL, DuJ, LiF, FangH, HuaJ, WanCDiagnostic efficacy of contrast-enhanced sonography by combined qualitative and quantitative analysis in breast lesions. J Ultras Med.-. 2013;32(10):1805–1814. doi:10.7863/ultra.32.10.1805.
30.
WangY, FanW, ZhaoS, ZhangK, ZhangL, ZhangP, etalQualitative, quantitative and combination score systems in differential diagnosis of breast lesions by contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85(1):48–54. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.10.017.
31.
XiaH, WangX, DingH, WenJ, FanP, WangWPapillary breast lesions on contrast-enhanced ultrasound: Morphological enhancement patterns and diagnostic strategy. Eur Radiol. 2014;24(12):3178–3190. doi:10.1007/s00330-014-3375-7.
32.
XiaoX, ChenX, GuanX, WuH, QinW, LuoBSuperb microvascular imaging in diagnosis of breast lesions: A comparative study with contrast-enhanced ultrasonographic microvascular imaging. The British Journal of Radiology. 2016;89(1066):20160546. doi:10.1259/bjr.20160546.
33.
HuW, DongY, ZhangX, ZhangH, LiF, BaiMThe clinical value of Arrival-time Parametric Imaging using contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2020;75(3):369–382. doi:10.3233/CH-200826.
34.
LengX, HuangG, LiS, YaoM, DingJ, MaFCorrelation of breast cancer microcirculation construction with tumor stem cells (CSCs) and epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) based on contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Plos One.e38. 2021;16(12):e261138. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0261138.
35.
TracyA, JaffeLCMJ Small-Bowel Obstruction: Coronal Reformations from Isotropic Voxels at 16-Section Multi –Detector Row CT1.
36.
NiuR, LiS, WangB, JiangY, LiuG, WangZPapillary breast lesions detected using conventional ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound: Imaging characteristics and associations with malignancy. Eur J Radiol.88. 2021;141 :109788. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109788.
37.
Pathologic Outcomes of nonmalignant Papillary Breast lesions Diagnosed at imaging-guided core needle Biopsy1. Pathologic Outcomes of nonmalignant Papillary Breast lesions Diagnosed at imaging-guided core needle Biopsy1.
