Evaluation of Diagnostic Performance of Automatic Breast Volume Scanner Compared to Handheld Ultrasound on Different Breast Lesions: A Systematic Review

Ibraheem, Shahad A.; Mahmud, Rozi; Saini, Suraini Mohamad; Hassan, Hasyma Abu; Keiteb, Aysar Sabah; Dirie, Ahmed M.

doi:10.3390/diagnostics12020541

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 44 publications

(65 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…ABVS is an innovation in breast ultrasound, and has been applied in many medical institutions. Two systematic reviews 14,15 have concluded that its diagnostic performance in breast diseases is equivalent to that of ultrasound. ABVS can also reconstruct coronal images to provide additional information.…”

Section: Bi-rads Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Value of multimodal imaging in the diagnosis of breast sclerosing adenosis associated with malignant lesions

Chen

Dai

et al. 2022

J of Clinical Ultrasound

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim To explore the diagnostic value of multimodal imaging techniques, including automatic breast volume scanner (ABVS), mammography (MG), and magnetic resonance (MRI) in breast sclerosing adenosis (SA) associated with malignant lesions. Methods From January 2018 to October 2020, 76 patients (88 lesions) with pathologically confirmed as SA associated with malignant or benign lesions were retrospective analyzed. All patients completed ABVS examination, 58 patients (67 lesions) with MG and 50 patients (62 lesions) with MRI were also completed before biopsy or surgical excision, of which, six patients (eight lesions) diagnosed as Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI‐RADS) category 3 by all imaging examinations underwent surgical excision without biopsy, other 70 patients (80 lesions) with BI‐RADS category 4 or above by any imaging examination completed biopsy, including 65 patients (75 lesions) were further surgical excised and the other five patients (five lesions) were just followed up. All lesions were retrospectively described and classified, and were divided into benign group and malignant group according to their pathological results. Image features of different examination methods between the two groups were compared and analyzed. A ROC curve was established using the sensitivity of BI‐RADS categories to predict malignant lesions in different imaging techniques as the ordinate and 1‐specificity as the abscissa. Results 88 lesions including 26 purely SA and 45 SA associated with benign lesions were classified as benign group, and the remaining 17 SA associated with malignant lesions were classified as malignant group. On ABVS, 40 mass lesions, their heterogeneous echo, not circumscribed margin and coronal convergence signs were statistically significant for malignant lesions (p < .05), but the remain 48 nonmass lesions lack specific sonographic features. On MG, 12 showed negative results, 55 showed with microcalcification, mass, structural distortion, and asymmetric density shadow, of which 11 lesions had the above two signs at the same time, but only microcalcification had statistical difference between the two groups. 35 mass enhanced lesions and 27 nonmass enhanced lesions on MRI, but there were no significant difference between their pathological results. Time signal intensity curves showed no differences, but ADC value <1.10 × 10−3 mm2/s is more significant in malignant lesions (p < .05). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of BI‐RADS classification of ABVS, MG, and MRI in the diagnosis of malignant lesions were 0.611, 0.474, and 0.751, respectively, and the AUC of the combined diagnosis of the three was 0.761. Conclusion Mass lesions with heterogeneous echo, not circumscribed margin and coronal convergence sign on ABVS, microcalcification on MG and the ADC value <1.10 × 10−3 mm2/s on MRI are significant signs for SA associated with malignant lesions. The combined diagnosis of the three methods was the highest, and the following were MRI, ABVS, and MG. Therefore, be cognizant of significant...

show abstract

Section: Bi-rads Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Value of multimodal imaging in the diagnosis of breast sclerosing adenosis associated with malignant lesions

Chen

Dai

et al. 2022

J of Clinical Ultrasound

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As shown in a systematic review study conducted by Ibraheem et al in 2022, the identified malignancies had a mean percentage of 94% (81–100%) in comparison to the non-cancer in all studies, and the found tumors had a mean size of 2.1 cm. The data in the literature indicates that ABUS and HHUS perform similarly to one another in terms of differentiating between malignant and benign breast tumors [ 10 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to the literature review conducted by Ibraheem et al (2022), ABUS had considerably greater diagnostic accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value in our study. The radiologists’ performance in terms of detection, sensitivity, and specificity did not significantly differ between the two modalities ( p > 0.05) [ 10 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To minimize variability in lesion characterization and final lesion assessment from ultrasound, the American College of Radiology developed the breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) lexicon, which is now in its fifth edition. Furthermore, no substantial differences were discovered between ABUS and HHUS in terms of diagnostic performance for breast cancer despite having technical differences between them [ 9 , 10 ]. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnosis performance of prototype HHUS compared to ABUS according to the fifth edition of BI-RADS among females with positive lumps.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Diagnostic Performance of Prototype Handheld Ultrasound According to the Fifth Edition of BI-RADS for Breast Ultrasound Compared with Automated Breast Ultrasound among Females with Positive Lumps

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(1) Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of prototype handheld ultrasound compared to automated breast ultrasound, according to the fifth edition of BI-RADS categorization, among females with positive lumps. (2) Methods: A total of 1004 lesions in 162 participants who underwent both prototype handheld ultrasound and automated breast ultrasound were included. Two radiologists and a sonographer independently evaluated the sonographic features of each lesion according to the fifth BI-RADS edition. The kappa coefficient (κ) was calculated for each BI-RADS descriptor and final assessment category. The cross-tabulation was performed to see whether there were differences between the ABUS and prototype HHUS results. Specificity and sensitivity were evaluated and compared using the McNamar test. (3) Results: ABUS and prototype HHUS observers found the same number of breast lesions in the 324 breasts of the 162 respondents. There was no significant difference in the mean lesion size, with a maximum mean length dimension of 0.48 ± 0.33 cm. The assessment of the lesion’s shape, orientation, margin, echo pattern, posterior acoustic features, and calcification was obtained with good to excellent agreements between ABUS and prototype HHUS observers (κ = 0.70–1.0). There was absolutely no significant difference between ABUS and prototype HHUS in assessment of lesion except for lesion orientation p = 0.00. Diagnostic accuracy (99.8% and 97.7–98.9%), sensitivity (99.5% and 98.0–99.0%), specificity (99.8% and 99.6–99.8%), positive predictive value (98.1% and 90.3–96.2%), negative predictive value (90.0% and 84.4–88.7%), and areas under the curve (0.98 and 0.83–0.92; p < 0.05) were not significantly different between ABUS and prototype HHUS observers. (4) Conclusion: According to the fifth BI-RADS edition, automated breast ultrasound is not statistically significantly different from prototype handheld ultrasound with regard to interobserver variability and diagnostic performance.

show abstract

“…и соавт. был проведен систематический обзор для сравнения диагностических характеристик автоматического сканера объема молочной железы (automatic breast volume scanner -ABVS) с ручным ультразвуком (handheld ultrasound -HHUS) при дифференциальной диагностике доброкачественных и злокачественных поражений молочной железы [11] Иной вариант, представленной Tsumura R. и соавт. ультразвуковой платформы для проведения УЗИ плода, имеет оси x и y, по которым осуществляется передвижение концевого эффектора с ультразвуковым датчиком [14].…”

Section: результатыunclassified

Ultrasound robots: ready-to-use solutions and perspective directions.

Lebedev¹,

Shaderkin²,

Shaderkina³

2022

RJTEH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction. Ultrasonography (US) is one of the most wide-spread methods of diagnostic because this examination is simple and non-invasive. But it has several limitations such as non-reproducibility, operator-dependance and mixing of data obtaining (manual US examination) and data analyzing. Use of robotic systems for sonography is a perspective technological method which can potentially solve these limitations. Automated ultrasound breast scanning is one of the prime examples of robotic systems’ application. The aim of our article is to review solutions for ultrasonography robotization. Materials and methods. The research was conducted on Pubmed database. Results. In this article we present examples of different types of robots and robotic systems for ultrasound examination with description of their features and applications. Here we present our analysis of results that were obtained during research, robots’ classifications, fields of use and perspectives of application. Conclusion. Use of robots for ultrasound examination is perspective for decrease of sonographers’ burden, separation of data obtaining and data analyzing. It also provides changing of the workflow of ultrasound examinations making them more effective and less operator-dependent.

show abstract

Evaluation of Diagnostic Performance of Automatic Breast Volume Scanner Compared to Handheld Ultrasound on Different Breast Lesions: A Systematic Review

Cited by 7 publications

References 44 publications

Value of multimodal imaging in the diagnosis of breast sclerosing adenosis associated with malignant lesions

Value of multimodal imaging in the diagnosis of breast sclerosing adenosis associated with malignant lesions

Diagnostic Performance of Prototype Handheld Ultrasound According to the Fifth Edition of BI-RADS for Breast Ultrasound Compared with Automated Breast Ultrasound among Females with Positive Lumps

Ultrasound robots: ready-to-use solutions and perspective directions.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About