Ultrasonography as adjunct to mammography in the evaluation of breast tumors.

Acta radiologica. Supplementum Pub Date : 1999-01-01
P Skaane
{"title":"Ultrasonography as adjunct to mammography in the evaluation of breast tumors.","authors":"P Skaane","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aims of the study was to analyze the features of cancers missed as tumor on ultrasonography (US), to determine the predictive power of US tumor descriptors in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast tumors, to evaluate US as adjunct to mammography, and to assess the validity and reliability of mammographic, US, and combined interpretation of breast tumors.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Prospectively recorded mammographic and US findings of 355 malignant breast tumors among 2,985 consecutive patients who underwent breast US were compared with clinical findings and pathologic subtypes of the tumors. In addition, a 10-year material of 95 invasive lobular carcinomas (ILCs) were investigated. Three retrospective studies assessed the validity and reliability of mammographic, US, and combined interpretation of 200 palpable mammographically noncalcified breast masses by four radiologists.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 97.5% of the palpable and 67.9% of the nonpalpable malignant neoplasms were detected as tumor on US. Most carcinomas missed as tumor on US were ductal carcinomas in situ (DCISs) and microinvasive ductal cancers dominated by DCIS manifesting with suspicious calcifications on mammography. Irregular shape, irregular contour, extensively hypoechogenicity, hyperechoic rim (halo), and distortion of the surrounding tissue were the US features with the highest odds of predicting carcinomas. A pseudocapsule is the strongest predictor of a benign tumor, the odds of cancer being 0.03 in nonpalpable and 0.08 in palpable breast tumors. A negative predictive value of 100% in palpable and 96% in nonpalpable tumors was achieved using strict US criteria. In patients with ILC, US measurements predicted tumor size more accurately than mammography. US as adjunct to mammography correctly diagnosed (\"upgraded\") 9.5% of tumors with benign or indeterminate mammographic diagnoses. Excluding mammographically conclusive malignant tumors and carcinomas presenting with microcalcifications. US correctly upgraded 42% of the palpable and 44% of the nonpalpable cancers. Combined mammographic-US interpretation offers the highest diagnostic performance in noncalcified breast tumors. The lowest interobserver agreement was found in US interpretation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The impact of US in mixed cancer populations is limited. US is, however, a valuable adjunct to mammography in patients with nonconclusive mammographic findings. Negative predictive values on US approaching 100% may be achieved using strict criteria for a benign diagnosis. A considerable interobserver variation in the US interpretation is a limiting factor for the potential of breast US in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast tumors.</p>","PeriodicalId":7159,"journal":{"name":"Acta radiologica. Supplementum","volume":"420 ","pages":"1-47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta radiologica. Supplementum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The aims of the study was to analyze the features of cancers missed as tumor on ultrasonography (US), to determine the predictive power of US tumor descriptors in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast tumors, to evaluate US as adjunct to mammography, and to assess the validity and reliability of mammographic, US, and combined interpretation of breast tumors.

Material and methods: Prospectively recorded mammographic and US findings of 355 malignant breast tumors among 2,985 consecutive patients who underwent breast US were compared with clinical findings and pathologic subtypes of the tumors. In addition, a 10-year material of 95 invasive lobular carcinomas (ILCs) were investigated. Three retrospective studies assessed the validity and reliability of mammographic, US, and combined interpretation of 200 palpable mammographically noncalcified breast masses by four radiologists.

Results: A total of 97.5% of the palpable and 67.9% of the nonpalpable malignant neoplasms were detected as tumor on US. Most carcinomas missed as tumor on US were ductal carcinomas in situ (DCISs) and microinvasive ductal cancers dominated by DCIS manifesting with suspicious calcifications on mammography. Irregular shape, irregular contour, extensively hypoechogenicity, hyperechoic rim (halo), and distortion of the surrounding tissue were the US features with the highest odds of predicting carcinomas. A pseudocapsule is the strongest predictor of a benign tumor, the odds of cancer being 0.03 in nonpalpable and 0.08 in palpable breast tumors. A negative predictive value of 100% in palpable and 96% in nonpalpable tumors was achieved using strict US criteria. In patients with ILC, US measurements predicted tumor size more accurately than mammography. US as adjunct to mammography correctly diagnosed ("upgraded") 9.5% of tumors with benign or indeterminate mammographic diagnoses. Excluding mammographically conclusive malignant tumors and carcinomas presenting with microcalcifications. US correctly upgraded 42% of the palpable and 44% of the nonpalpable cancers. Combined mammographic-US interpretation offers the highest diagnostic performance in noncalcified breast tumors. The lowest interobserver agreement was found in US interpretation.

Conclusion: The impact of US in mixed cancer populations is limited. US is, however, a valuable adjunct to mammography in patients with nonconclusive mammographic findings. Negative predictive values on US approaching 100% may be achieved using strict criteria for a benign diagnosis. A considerable interobserver variation in the US interpretation is a limiting factor for the potential of breast US in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast tumors.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
超声检查辅助乳房x光检查对乳腺肿瘤的评价。
目的:本研究的目的是分析超声未检出的肿瘤特征,确定超声肿瘤描述符对乳腺良恶性肿瘤鉴别的预测能力,评价超声辅助乳房x光检查的作用,评价超声、超声及联合解释乳腺肿瘤的有效性和可靠性。材料与方法:对2,985例连续行乳腺超声检查的355例乳腺恶性肿瘤进行前瞻性记录的乳腺x线和超声检查结果,并将其临床表现和病理亚型进行比较。此外,我们还研究了95例浸润性小叶癌(ILCs)的10年资料。三个回顾性研究评估了4位放射科医生对200个可触及的乳房x光检查非钙化肿块的x光检查、超声检查和综合解释的有效性和可靠性。结果:超声检查可触及的恶性肿瘤检出率为97.5%,不可触及的肿瘤检出率为67.9%。超声检查未诊断为肿瘤的多为导管原位癌(DCISs)和以DCIS为主的微创导管癌,乳房x线检查表现为可疑的钙化。不规则的形状、不规则的轮廓、广泛的低回声、高回声的边缘(晕)和周围组织的扭曲是预测癌的最高几率的US特征。假包膜是良性肿瘤的最强预测因子,在不可触及的乳房肿瘤中癌症的几率为0.03,在可触及的乳房肿瘤中为0.08。采用严格的美国标准,可触及肿瘤的阴性预测值为100%,不可触及肿瘤的阴性预测值为96%。在ILC患者中,超声测量比乳房x光检查更准确地预测肿瘤大小。超声辅助乳房x光检查正确诊断(“升级”)9.5%的肿瘤为良性或不确定的乳房x光检查诊断。排除乳房x线摄影结论性恶性肿瘤和以微钙化为表现的癌。美国对42%的可触及癌和44%的不可触及癌进行了正确升级。联合乳房x线摄影-美国解释在非钙化乳腺肿瘤中提供最高的诊断性能。观察员间一致性最低的是美国的口译。结论:US对混合癌人群的影响是有限的。然而,在乳房x光检查结果不确定的患者中,US是一种有价值的辅助手段。使用严格的良性诊断标准,可以达到接近100%的阴性预测值。在超声判读中,观察者之间存在相当大的差异,这是乳腺超声鉴别乳腺良恶性肿瘤潜力的一个限制因素。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography: development and optimization of techniques for paramagnetic and hyperpolarized contrast media. Aspects of temporal bone anatomy and pathology in conjunction with cochlear implant surgery. XI International Workshop in Magnetic Resonance Angiography: new aspects on visualisation of macro- and microcirculation. Lund, Sweden, September 22-25, 1999. Abstracts. Ultrasonography as adjunct to mammography in the evaluation of breast tumors. The postoperative lumbar spine. A radiological investigation of the lumbar spine after discectomy using MR imaging and CT.
×
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:481959085
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