Shear wave versus strain elastography in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions

Shear wave versus strain elastography in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions

Background/aim: To evaluate and compare the diagnostic performances of shear wave elastography (SWE) and strain elastography (SE)in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions.Materials and methods: The current study included 87 breast lesions in 84 patients. The Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System(BIRADS) categories were determined with ultrasound features. The maximum shear wave velocity (SWV), mean SWV, maximumSWV to fat SWV ratio, and mean SWV to fat SWV ratio were measured using SWE. The strain ratio (SR) was calculated as the ratio oflesion strain to the adjacent fat strain using SE. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to assess and comparethe diagnostic performances of each parameter.Results: Forty-five benign and 42 malignant lesions were diagnosed. The sensitivity and specificity of the BIRADS classification was100% and 35.6%, respectively. Selecting a cutoff SR value of 3.22 led to an 88.1% sensitivity and an 88.4% specificity (AUC: 0.913 [95%CI: 0.854–0.971], P < 0.001). Selecting cutoff maximum SWV value of 3.41 m/s led to an 88.1% sensitivity and an 86.7% specificity(AUC: 0.918 [95% CI: 0.858–0.978], P < 0.001). The diagnostic performance of the maximum SWV, mean SWV, and maximum SWV tofat SWV ratio were similar to the diagnostic performance of the SR (P = 1.00, P = 1.00, P = 0.629, respectively).Conclusion: SE and SWE are both feasible imaging modalities in the differentiation of malignant and benign breast lesions with similardiagnostic performances.

___

  • 1. Kim YS, Park JG, Kim BS, Lee CH, Ryu DW. Diagnostic value of elastography using acoustic radiation force impulse imaging and strain ratio for breast tumors. Journal of Breast Cancer 2014; 17(1): 76-82.
  • 2. Ianculescu V, Ciolovan LM, Dunant A, Vielh P, Mazouni C et al. Added value of Virtual Touch IQ shear wave elastography in the ultrasound assessment of breast lesions. European Journal of Radiology 2014; 83(5): 773-777.
  • 3. Balçık A, Polat AV, Bayrak İK, Polat AK. Efficacy of sonoelastography in distinguishing benign from malignant breast masses. The Journal of Breast Health 2016; 12(1): 37-43.
  • 4. Polat AV, Ozturk M, Akyuz B, Celenk C, Kefeli M et al. The diagnostic value of shear wave elastography for parathyroid lesions and comparison with cervical lymph nodes. Medical Ultrasonography 2017; 19(4): 386-391.
  • 5. Bekci T, Ceyhan Bilgici M, Genc G, Tekcan D, Polat AV et al. Evaluation of renal parenchyma elasticity with acoustic radiation force impulse quantification in nutcracker syndrome and comparisons with grayscale doppler sonography and laboratory findings. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine 2017; 36(1): 61-67.
  • 6. Aydin R, Elmali M, Polat AV, Danaci M, Akpolat I. Comparison of muscle-to-nodule and parenchyma-to-nodule strain ratios in the differentiation of benign and malignant thyroid nodules: Which one should we use? European Journal of Radiology 2014; 83 (3): e131-e136.
  • 7. Garra BS. Imaging and estimation of tissue elasticity by ultrasound. Ultrasound Quarterly. 2007; 23(4): 255-268.
  • 8. Tozaki M, Isobe S, Sakamoto M. Combination of elastography and tissue quantification using the acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) technology for differential diagnosis of breast masses. Japanese Journal of Radiology 2012; 30(8): 659-670.
  • 9. Burnside ES, Hall TJ, Sommer AM, Hesley GK, Sisney GA et al. Differentiating benign from malignant solid breast masses with US strain imaging. Radiology 2007; 245(2): 401-410.
  • 10. Chang JM, Moon WK, Cho N, Kim SJ. Breast mass evaluation: factors influencing the quality of US elastography. Radiology 2011; 259(1): 59-64.
  • 11. Xue Y, Yao S, Li X, Zhang H. Value of shear wave elastography in discriminating malignant and benign breast lesions: A meta analysis. Medicine 2017; 96(42): e7412
  • 12. Seo M, Ahn HS, Park SH, Lee JB, Choi BI et al. Comparison and combination of strain and shear wave elastography of breast masses for differentiation of benign and malignant lesions by quantitative assessment: preliminary study. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine 2018; 37(1): 99-109.
  • 13. Chang JM, Won JK, Lee KB, Park IA, Yi A et al. Comparison of shear-wave and strain ultrasound elastography in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions. AJR American Journal of Roentgenology 2013; 201(2): W347-W356.
  • 14. Barr RG, Zhang, Z. Shear-wave elastography of the breast: value of a quality measure and comparison with strain elastography. Radiology 2014; 275(1): 45-53.
  • 15. Youk JH, Son EJ, Gweon HM, Kim H, Park YJ et al. Comparison of strain and shear wave elastography for the differentiation of benign from malignant breast lesions, combined with B-mode ultrasonography: qualitative and quantitative assessments. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 2014; 40(10): 2336-2344.
  • 16. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis, CA, Glasziou PP et al. STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. Radiology 2015; 277(3): 826-832.
  • 17. Sickles EA, D’Orsi CJ, Bassett LW et al. ACR BI-RADS Mammography. In: D’Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, Morris EA et al. (editors) ACR BI-RADS Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA, USA: American College of Radiology, 2013; pp. 134-136.
  • 18. Burnside ES, Hall TJ, Sommer AM, Hesley, GK, Sisney GA et al. Differentiating benign from malignant solid breast masses with US strain imaging. Radiology 2007; 245(2): 401-410.
  • 19. Cosgrove DO, Berg WA, Doré CJ, Skyba, DM, Henry JP et al. Shear wave elastography for breast masses is highly reproducible. European Radiology 2012; 22(5): 1023-1032.
  • 20. Thomas A, Degenhardt F, Farrokh A, Wojcinski S, Slowinski T et al. Significant differentiation of focal breast lesions: calculation of strain ratio in breast sonoelastography. Academic Radiology 2010; 17(5): 558-563.
  • 21. Zhi H, Xiao XY, Yang HY, Ou B, Wen YL et al. Ultrasonic elastography in breast cancer diagnosis: strain ratio vs 5-point scale. Academic Radiology 2010; 17(10): 1227-1233.
  • 22. Zhao QL, Ruan LT, Zhang H, Yin YM, Duan SX. Diagnosis of solid breast lesions by elastography 5-point score and strain ratio method. European Journal of Radiology 2012; 81(11): 3245-3249.
  • 23. Tang L, Xu HX, Bo XW, Liu BJ, Li XL et al. A novel two-dimensional quantitative shear wave elastography for differentiating malignant from benign breast lesions. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine 2015; 8(7): 10920-10928.
  • 24. Golatta M, Schweitzer-Martin M, Harcos A, Schott S, Gomez C et al. Evaluation of virtual touch tissue imaging quantification, a new shear wave velocity imaging method, for breast lesion assessment by ultrasound. BioMed Research International 2014; 2014: 960262.
  • 25. Tozaki M, Saito M, Benson J, Fan L, Isobe S. Shear wave velocity measurements for differential diagnosis of solid breast masses: a comparison between virtual touch quantification and virtual touch IQ. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 2013; 39(12): 2233-2245.
  • 26. Magalhães M, Belo-Oliveira P, Casalta-Lopes J, Costa Y, Gonçalo M et al. Diagnostic value of ARFI (Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse) in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions. Academic Radiology 2017; 24(1): 45-52.
  • 27. Kapetas P, Pinker-Domenig K, Woitek R, Clauser P, Bernathova M et al. Clinical application of acoustic radiation force impulse imaging with virtual touch IQ in breast ultrasound: diagnostic performance and reproducibility of a new technique. Acta Radiologica 2017; 58(2): 140-147.
  • 28. Li XL, Xu HX, Bo XW, Liu BJ, Huang X et al. Value of virtual touch tissue imaging quantification for evaluation of ultrasound breast imaging-reporting and data system Category 4 lesions. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 2016; 42(9): 2050- 2057.
  • 29. Li DD, Xu HX, Guo LH, Bo XW, Li XL et al. Combination of two-dimensional shear wave elastography with ultrasound breast imaging reporting and data system in the diagnosis of breast lesions: a new method to increase the diagnostic performance. European Radiology 2016; 26(9): 3290-3300
Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences-Cover
  • ISSN: 1300-0144
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 6 Sayı
  • Yayıncı: TÜBİTAK