Reliability of automated versus handheld breast ultrasound examinations of suspicious breast masses

Yun, Gabin; Kim, Sun Mi; Yun, Bo La; Ahn, Hye Shin; Jang, Mijung

doi:10.14366/usg.18055

Cited by 15 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Yun et al, in a study performed on 135 asymptomatic women, noted that the agreement in confirmed malignancies was 55.1% (kappa = 0.39, P <0.001). 15 In our study group, the agreement on the BI-RADS category between ABUS and HHUS for confirmed malignant breast tumors was good (86.63%, kappa = 0.77). Among the discrepancies in all malignant cases, the BI-RADS assessment category assigned using ABUS tended to be higher than HHUS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 51%

Dependability of Automated Breast Ultrasound (ABUS) in Assessing Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Category and Size of Malignant Breast Lesions Compared with Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) and Mammography (MG)

Chen¹,

Han²,

Jing³

et al. 2021

IJGM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the dependability of automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) compared with handheld ultrasound (HHUS) and mammography (MG) on the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category and size assessment of malignant breast lesions. Patients and Methods: A total of 344 confirmed malignant lesions were recruited. All participants underwent MG, HHUS, and ABUS examinations. Agreements on the BI-RADS category were evaluated. Lesion size assessed using the three methods was compared with the size of the pathological result as the control. Regarding the four major molecular subtypes, correlation coefficients between size on imaging and pathology were also evaluated. Results:The agreement between ABUS and HHUS on the BI-RADS category was 86.63% (kappa = 0.77), whereas it was 32.22% (kappa = 0.10) between ABUS and MG. Imaging lesion size compared to pathologic lesion size was assessed correctly in 36.92%/52.91% (ABUS), 33.14%/48.84% (HHUS) and 33.44%/43.87% (MG), with the threshold of 3 mm/5 mm, respectively. The correlation coefficient of size of ABUS-Pathology (0.75, Spearman) was statistically higher than that of the MG-Pathology (0.58, Spearman) with P < 0.01, but not different from that of the HHUS-Pathology (0.74, Spearman) with P > 0.05. The correlation coefficient of ABUS-Pathology was statistically higher than that of MG-Pathology in the triple-negative subtype, luminal B subtype, and luminal A subtype (P<0.01). Conclusion:The agreement between ABUS and HHUS in the BI-RADS category was good, whereas that between ABUS and MG was poor. ABUS and HHUS allowed a more accurate assessment of malignant tumor size compared to MG.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 51%

Dependability of Automated Breast Ultrasound (ABUS) in Assessing Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Category and Size of Malignant Breast Lesions Compared with Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) and Mammography (MG)

Chen¹,

Han²,

Jing³

et al. 2021

IJGM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The k value is not only higher than those reported for real-time m-US but also higher than most κ values found for BI-RADS agreement in studies retrospectively reviewing static images (Table 5 ). Comparing final BI-RADS assessment in automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) and m-US agreement k values of 0.61[ 35 ] and 0.49 [ 37 ] in a selected study population, and k value of 0.99 [ 36 ] in a screening situation have been reported. In daily clinical practice, the management of patients with breast disease is largely determined by the final BI-RADS classification [ 38 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agreement in breast lesion assessment and final BI-RADS classification between radial and meander-like breast ultrasound

Brasier-Lutz

Jäggi-Wickes

Schaedelin³

et al. 2021

BMC Med Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study prospectively investigates the agreement between radial (r-US) and meander-like (m-US) breast ultrasound with regard to lesion location, lesion size, morphological characteristics and final BI-RADS classification of individual breast lesions. Methods Each patient of a consecutive, unselected, mixed collective received a dual ultrasound examination. Results The agreement between r-US and m-US for lesion location ranged from good (lesion to mammilla distance ICC 0.64; lesion to skin distance ICC 0.72) to substantial (clock-face localization κ 0.70). For lesion size the agreement was good (diameter ICC 0.72; volume ICC 0.69), for lesion margin and architectural distortion it was substantial (κ 0.68 and 0.70, respectively). Most importantly, there was a substantial agreement (κ 0.76) in the final BI-RADS classification between r-US and m-US. Conclusions Our recent comparison of radial and meander-like breast US revealed that the diagnostic accuracy of the two scanning methods was comparable. In this study, we observe a high degree of agreement between m-US and r-US for the lesion description (location, size, morphology) and final BI-RADS classification. These findings corroborate that r-US is a suitable alternative to m-US in daily clinical practice. Trial registration NCT02358837. Registered January 2015, retrospectively registered https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=NCT02358837&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=

show abstract

“…In previous studies, lower diagnostic sensitivity and speci city restricted the use of ABUS [31]. Therefore, it is critical to determine independent breast NML risk factors to enhance diagnostic capability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative study of multiple breast cancer screening methods in the evaluation of breast non-mass-like lesions

Zhang

Cai

Chen

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare multiple breast cancer screening methods for evaluating breast non-mass-like lesions (NMLs) and to investigate the best screening method for breast non-mass-like lesions (NMLs). Methods: This retrospective study examined 253 patients aged 24 to 68 years who were diagnosed with breast NMLs from April 2017 to December 2019. All lesions were evaluated by MG, HHUS, and ABUS to determine BI-RADS classification, underwent pathological examination within six months or at least 2 years of follow-up. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive values (PPV), and negative predictive values (NPV) of MG, HHUS, and ABUS features in the prediction of malignancy were compared. Independent risk factors for malignancy were assessed using non-conditional logistic regression. Results: MG, HHUS, and ABUS findings significantly differed between benign and malignant breast NML, including internal echo, hyperechoic spot, peripheral blood flow, internal blood flow, catheter change, peripheral change, coronal features of ABUS, and structural distortion, asymmetry, and calcification in MG. ABUS was superior to MG and HHUS in sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, as well as in evaluating the necessity of biopsy and accuracy in identifying malignancy. MG was superior to HHUS in specificity, PPV, and accuracy in evaluating the need for biopsy. HHUS was distinctly superior to MG in sensitivity and NPV in determining malignancy; however, specificity, PPV, and accuracy were similar. Moreover, internal blood flow, calcification, and coronal plane feature were independent risk factors in distinguishing benign and malignant lesions. Conclusions: ABUS was superior to HHUS and MG in evaluating the need for biopsy and differentiating benign and malignant in breast NMLs. Compared to each other, HHUS and MG had their own relative advantages. Internal blood flow, calcification, and coronal plane feature were independent risk factors in identifying benign and malignant lesions.

show abstract

Reliability of automated versus handheld breast ultrasound examinations of suspicious breast masses

Cited by 15 publications

References 23 publications

Dependability of Automated Breast Ultrasound (ABUS) in Assessing Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Category and Size of Malignant Breast Lesions Compared with Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) and Mammography (MG)

Dependability of Automated Breast Ultrasound (ABUS) in Assessing Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Category and Size of Malignant Breast Lesions Compared with Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) and Mammography (MG)

Agreement in breast lesion assessment and final BI-RADS classification between radial and meander-like breast ultrasound

Comparative study of multiple breast cancer screening methods in the evaluation of breast non-mass-like lesions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About