Contrastive study on conventional ultrasound, compression elastography and acoustic radiation force impulse imaging in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast tumors
10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2014.12.005
- VernacularTitle:常规超声、压迫式弹性成像及声脉冲辐射力成像鉴别诊断良恶性乳腺肿瘤的对比研究
- Author:
Lu ZHANG
;
Ping ZHOU
;
Jin DENG
;
Shuangming TIAN
;
Ying QIAN
;
Xiaomin WU
;
Shuhua MA
;
Jiale LI
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
breast tumors;
conventional ultrasound;
elastography;
acoustic radiation force impulse imaging;
differential diagnosis
- From:
Journal of Central South University(Medical Sciences)
2014;(12):1246-1252
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of conventional ultrasound, compression elastography (CE) and acoustic radiation force impulse imaging (ARFI) in diff erential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast tumors. Methods: A total of 98 patients with liver lesions were included in the study. The images of conventional ultrasound, CE and the values of virtual touch tissue quantiifcation (VTQ) of breast lesions were obtained. hTe diagnostic performance of conventional ultrasound, CE and ARFI were assessed by using pathology as the gold standard, and then evaluate the diagnosis effciency of these three approaches in differential diagnosing benign and malignant breast tumors. Results: The specificity, sensitivity and accuracy in the diagnosis of malignant breast tumors for conventional ultrasound were 80.0%, 81.1% and 81.7%, respectively, whereas for CE elastic score were 85.7%, 86.7% and 86.3%, respectively. With a cutoff value of 3.71 for the SR, the sensitivity, speciifcity, accuracy in diagnosis of malignant breast tumors were 97.1%, 83.3% and 88.4%, respectively. With a cutoff value of 3.78 m/s for VTQ, the sensitivity, speciifcity, accuracy in diagnosis of malignant breast tumors were 94.3%, 91.7% and 92.6%, respectively. The difference in diagnosis efficiency among ARFI, CE and conventional ultrasound in differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast tumors was signiifcant (P<0.05). Conclusion: Conventional ultrasound, CE and ARFI are all useful for the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast tumors. But the diagnosis effciency of ARFI is superior to CE and conventional ultrasound. The three approaches can help each other in differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast tumors.
