Diagnosis of breast architectural distortion with digital breast tomosynthesis
10.13929/j.issn.1003-3289.2020.07.021
- VernacularTitle: 数字乳腺断层摄影诊断乳腺结构扭曲病变
- Author:
Shanshan XING
1
Author Information
1. Department of Imaging Center, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Breast diseases;
Diagnosis;
Mammography;
Ultrasonography, mammary
- From:
Chinese Journal of Medical Imaging Technology
2020;36(7):1031-1035
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective: To compare the value of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and flly-field digital mammography (FFDM) in evaluating breast architectural distortion (AD) lesions, and the value of DBT and ultrasound in differentiating benign and malignant breast AD. Methods: DBT, FFDM and ultrasound data of 58 patients with AD lesions detected with DBT were retrospectively analyzed. Taken pathological outcomes as standards, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of DBT and FFDM in evaluating breast AD were compared and analyzed. The consistency of results of DBT and ultrasound in differentiating benign and malignant breast AD with pathological results was analyzed. ROC curve of DBT and ultrasound for differentiating benign and malignant breast AD were drawn, and the diagnostic efficacies were compared. Results: All patients underwent FFDM, and 41 of them also underwent ultrasound examination. Among 58 cases of breast AD detected with DBT, only 23 AD were found with FFDM (χ2=33.03, P<0.05). The sensitivity (80.65% [25/31]) and accuracy (78.00% [39/50]) of DBT in diagnosis of dense breast with AD were higher than those of FFDM (35.48% [11/31], 48.00% [24/50], χ2=12.98, 9.65, both P<0.05), but the specificity (73.68% [14/19]) was no statistically different with that of FFDM (68.42% [13/19], χ2=0.13, P>0.05). Median consistency of DBT and ultrasound results was observed in differentiating benign and malignant breast AD and pathological results (Kappa=0.65, 0.71, both P<0.05). The sensitivity, specificity of DBT and ultrasound in differentiating benign and malignant breast AD was 91.30% (21/23), 72.22% (13/18) and 82.61% (19/23), 88.89% (16/18), respectively (Z=1.45, P>0.05). Conclusion: The sensitivity and accuracy of DBT in evaluating breast AD are higher than FFDM. DBT is comparable to ultrasound in differentiating benign and malignant breast AD. AD detected with DBT has relatively high malignancy, so it is recommended to conduct timely biopsy for correct diagnosis.
