Comparative Analysis of Automated and Handheld Breast Ultrasound Findings for Small (≤1 cm) Breast Cancers Based on BI-RADS Category.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Diagnostics Pub Date : 2025-01-17 DOI:10.3390/diagnostics15020212
Han Song Mun, Eun Young Ko, Boo-Kyung Han, Eun Sook Ko, Ji Soo Choi, Haejung Kim, Myoung Kyoung Kim, Jieun Kim
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Automated and Handheld Breast Ultrasound Findings for Small (≤1 cm) Breast Cancers Based on BI-RADS Category.","authors":"Han Song Mun, Eun Young Ko, Boo-Kyung Han, Eun Sook Ko, Ji Soo Choi, Haejung Kim, Myoung Kyoung Kim, Jieun Kim","doi":"10.3390/diagnostics15020212","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objectives</b>: This study aimed to compare ultrasound (US) findings between automated and handheld breast ultrasound (ABUS and HHUS, respectively) in small breast cancers, based on the breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) category. <b>Methods</b>: We included 51 women (mean age: 52 years; range: 39-66 years) with breast cancer (invasive or DCIS), all of whom underwent both ABUS and HHUS. Patients with tumors measuring ≤1 cm on either modality were enrolled. Two breast radiologists retrospectively evaluated multiple imaging features, including shape, orientation, margin, echo pattern, and posterior characteristics and assigned BI-RADS categories. Lesion sizes were compared between US and pathological findings. Statistical analyses were performed using Bowker's test of symmetry, a paired <i>t</i>-test, and a cumulative link mixed model. <b>Results</b>: ABUS assigned lower BI-RADS categories than HHUS while still maintaining malignancy suspicion in categories 4A or higher (54.8% consistent with HHUS; 37.3% downcategorized in ABUS, <i>p</i> = 0.005). While ABUS demonstrated less aggressive margins in some cases (61.3% consistent with HHUS; 25.8% showing fewer suspicious margins in ABUS), this difference was not statistically significant (<i>p</i> = 0.221). Similarly, ABUS exhibited slightly greater height-width ratios compared to HHUS (median, interquartile range: 0.98, 0.7-1.12 vs. 0.86, 0.74-1.10, <i>p</i> = 0.166). No significant differences were observed in other US findings or tumor sizes between the two modalities (all <i>p</i> > 0.05). <b>Conclusions</b>: Small breast cancers exhibited suspicious US features on both ABUS and HHUS, yet they were assigned lower BI-RADS assessment categories on ABUS compared to HHUS. Therefore, when conducting breast cancer screening with ABUS, it is important to remain attentive to even subtle suspicious findings, and active consideration for biopsy may be warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":11225,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostics","volume":"15 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11763899/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15020212","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to compare ultrasound (US) findings between automated and handheld breast ultrasound (ABUS and HHUS, respectively) in small breast cancers, based on the breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) category. Methods: We included 51 women (mean age: 52 years; range: 39-66 years) with breast cancer (invasive or DCIS), all of whom underwent both ABUS and HHUS. Patients with tumors measuring ≤1 cm on either modality were enrolled. Two breast radiologists retrospectively evaluated multiple imaging features, including shape, orientation, margin, echo pattern, and posterior characteristics and assigned BI-RADS categories. Lesion sizes were compared between US and pathological findings. Statistical analyses were performed using Bowker's test of symmetry, a paired t-test, and a cumulative link mixed model. Results: ABUS assigned lower BI-RADS categories than HHUS while still maintaining malignancy suspicion in categories 4A or higher (54.8% consistent with HHUS; 37.3% downcategorized in ABUS, p = 0.005). While ABUS demonstrated less aggressive margins in some cases (61.3% consistent with HHUS; 25.8% showing fewer suspicious margins in ABUS), this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.221). Similarly, ABUS exhibited slightly greater height-width ratios compared to HHUS (median, interquartile range: 0.98, 0.7-1.12 vs. 0.86, 0.74-1.10, p = 0.166). No significant differences were observed in other US findings or tumor sizes between the two modalities (all p > 0.05). Conclusions: Small breast cancers exhibited suspicious US features on both ABUS and HHUS, yet they were assigned lower BI-RADS assessment categories on ABUS compared to HHUS. Therefore, when conducting breast cancer screening with ABUS, it is important to remain attentive to even subtle suspicious findings, and active consideration for biopsy may be warranted.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于BI-RADS分类的小型(≤1 cm)乳腺癌自动与手持式超声检查结果对比分析
目的:本研究旨在比较基于乳腺成像报告和数据系统(BI-RADS)分类的自动和手持式乳腺超声(分别为ABUS和HHUS)在小乳腺癌中的超声结果。方法:我们纳入了51名女性(平均年龄:52岁;范围:39-66岁)患有乳腺癌(浸润性或DCIS),所有患者都接受了ABUS和HHUS。两种方式均纳入肿瘤尺寸≤1cm的患者。两名乳腺放射科医生回顾性评估了多种影像学特征,包括形状、方向、边缘、回声模式和后部特征,并分配了BI-RADS类别。比较超声与病理结果的病变大小。统计分析采用鲍克对称检验、配对t检验和累积联系混合模型。结果:ABUS的BI-RADS分类低于HHUS,但仍保持4A或更高分类的恶性嫌疑(54.8%与HHUS一致;37.3%在ABUS中被降级,p = 0.005)。虽然ABUS在某些病例中表现出较低的利润率(61.3%与HHUS一致;25.8%的ABUS患者可疑切缘较少),差异无统计学意义(p = 0.221)。同样,与HHUS相比,ABUS的高宽比略高(中位数,四分位数范围:0.98,0.7-1.12 vs. 0.86, 0.74-1.10, p = 0.166)。两种方式在其他US检查结果或肿瘤大小方面无显著差异(均p < 0.05)。结论:小乳腺癌在ABUS和HHUS上均表现出可疑的US特征,但与HHUS相比,它们在ABUS上的BI-RADS评估类别较低。因此,当用ABUS进行乳腺癌筛查时,重要的是要注意即使是细微的可疑发现,并积极考虑活检可能是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Diagnostics
Diagnostics Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Clinical Biochemistry
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
2699
审稿时长
19.64 days
期刊介绍: Diagnostics (ISSN 2075-4418) is an international scholarly open access journal on medical diagnostics. It publishes original research articles, reviews, communications and short notes on the research and development of medical diagnostics. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical research in as much detail as possible. Full experimental and/or methodological details must be provided for research articles.
期刊最新文献
Corneal Toxicity of Mirvetuximab Soravtansine: Multimodal Imaging Features and Implications for Ophthalmologic Management. Meta-Analytic Modeling to Define Decision Thresholds for Cerebrospinal Fluid Heparin-Binding Protein in Healthcare-Associated Ventriculitis and Meningitis. Genetic Disorders Detectable by Fetal MRI: A Review. Preoperative Gadoxetic-Acid-Enhanced MRI Features Associated with Rapid Recurrence (<6 Months) After Curative Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Investigation of the Prevalence of Associated Genetic Mutations (Co-Mutations) in Patients with Actionable Driver Mutations in Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1