ROLE OF MAMMOSONOGRAPHY AND ELASTOGRAPHY IN EVALUATION OF BREAST MASSES

Dr Mayur N Patel, Dr Hitesh K Rajpura

Abstract


OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the new method of sonoelastography which could improve the differentiation and characterization of benign and malignant breast lesions in comparison with the Mammosonography.

METHODS AND MATERIALS: From January 2016 and December-2017, 50 consecutive patients were diagnosed as benign or malignant by mammosonography and further analyzed with sonoelastography. The diagnostic results were evaluated with histopathologic findings. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated for each modality and the combination of sonoelastography and mammosonography.

RESULT: Of 50 lesions, 17 were histologically malignant, and 33 were benign. On the examination of benign and malignant lesions, the shape of the mass was described as oval or round (57.5% and 70.5%), margin as circumscribed (69.6% and 58.8%). Fibroadenoma was the most common benign lesion and ductal carcinoma was the most common malignant lesion noted in our study. The sensitivity, specificity of mammosonography was 69.7%, 70.59%, and sensitivity, specificity of with sonoelastography was 81.82%, 88.24% in our study.

CONCLUSION: Using elastography, a more accurate preoperative diagnosis can be made, thereby, obviating the need for aggressive biopsy in cases of benign lesions and improve the number of positive breast biopsies.

Keywords


Breast mass; Sonoelastography, Mammosonography

Full Text:

PDF

References


Jemal A, Murray T, Ward E, Samuels A, Tiwari RC, Ghafoor A, et al. Cancer statistics, 2005. CA Cancer J Clin 2005;55:10-30.

Tabar L, Yen MF, Vitak B, Chen HH, Smith RA, Duffy SW. Mammography service screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. Lancet 2003;361:1405-10

Kopans DB. Imagem da mama. 2ª ed. Rio de Janeiro: Medsi; 2000.

Fleury EFC, Rinaldi JF, Piato S, et al. Apresentação das lesões mamárias císticas à ultra-sonografia utilizando a elastografia. Radiol Bras. 2008;41:167–72.

Duncan JL 3 rd , Cederbom GJ, Champaign JL, Smetherman DH, King TA, Farr GH, et al. Benign diagnosis by image-guided core-needle breast biopsy. Am Surg 2000;66:5-9.

Chiou SY, Chou YH, Chiou HJ, Wang HK, Tiu CM, Tseng LM, et al. Sonographic features of nonpalpable breast cancer: A study based on ultrasound-guided wire-localized surgical biopsies. Ultrasound Med Biol 2006;32:1299-306.

Ophir J, Cespedes I, Ponnekanti H, Yazdi Y, Li X. Elastography: A quantitative method for imaging the elasticity of biological tissues. Ultrason Imaging 1991;13:111-34.

Itoh A, Ueno E, Tohno E, Kamma H, Takahashi H, Shiina T, et al. Breast disease: Clinical application of US elastography for diagnosis. Radiology 2006;239:341-50.

Camps J, Sentis C. Elastosonografia mamaria. Rev Chil Radiol. 2008;14:122–7.

Dobruch-Sobczak K. The differentiation of the character of solid lesions in the breast in the compression sonoelastography. Part I and II. J Ultrason. 2013;13(54):353-5.

Sadowsky N, Kopans DB. Breast cancer. RadiolClin North Am. 1983;21(1):51-65

Ha R, Kim H, Mango V, Wynn R, Comstock C. Ultrasonographic features and clinical implications of benign palpable breast lesions in young women. Ultrasonography. 2015;34(1):66-70.

Zhi H, Ou B, Luo BM, Feng X, Wen YL, Yang HY. Comparison of ultrasound elastography, mammography, and sonography in the diagnosis of solid breast lesions. Journal of ultrasound in medicine. 2007;26(6):807-15.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.