Korean Journal of Radiology

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Utility and Diagnostic Performance of Automated Breast Ultrasound System in Evaluating Pure Non-Mass Enhancement on Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging

  • Bo Ra Kwon (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Jung Min Chang (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Soo-Yeon Kim (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Su Hyun Lee (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Sung Ui Shin (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Ann Yi (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital Healthcare System Gangnam Center) ;
  • Nariya Cho (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Woo Kyung Moon (Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2018.12.17
  • Accepted : 2020.03.29
  • Published : 2020.11.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: To compare the utility and diagnostic performance of automated breast ultrasound system (ABUS) with that of handheld ultrasound (HHUS) in evaluating pure non-mass enhancement (NME) lesions on breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Materials and Methods: One hundred twenty-six consecutive MRI-visible pure NME lesions of 122 patients with breast cancer were assessed from April 2016 to March 2017. Two radiologists reviewed the preoperative breast MRI, ABUS, and HHUS images along with mammography (MG) findings. The NME correlation rate and diagnostic performance of ABUS were compared with that of HHUS, and the imaging features associated with ABUS visibility were analyzed. Results: Among 126 pure NME lesions, 100 (79.4%) were malignant and 26 (20.6%) were benign. The overall correlation rate was 87.3% (110/126) in ABUS and 92.9% (117/126) in HHUS. The sensitivity and specificity were 87% and 50% for ABUS and 92% and 42.3% for HHUS, respectively, with no significant differences (p = 0.180 and 0.727, respectively). Malignant NME was more frequently visualized than benign NME lesions on ABUS (93% vs. 65.4%, p = 0.001). Significant factors associated with the visibility of ABUS were the size of NME lesions on MRI (p < 0.001), their distribution pattern (p < 0.001), and microcalcifications on MG (p = 0.027). Conclusion: ABUS evaluation of pure NME lesions on MRI in patients with breast cancer is a useful technique with high visibility, especially in malignant lesions. The diagnostic performance of ABUS was comparable with that of conventional HHUS in evaluating NME lesions.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by a grant of the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), funded by the Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (grant number: HI15C1532).

References

  1. Morris EA, Comstock CE, Lee CH, Lehman CD, Ikeda DM, Newstead GM, et al. ACR BI-RADS(R) magnetic resonance imaging. In: American College of Radiology, eds. ACR BIRADS(R) atlas, breast imaging reporting and data system. Reston: American College of Radiology, 2013:12-21
  2. Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee MJ, Kaplan JB, LaTrenta LR, Menell JH, et al. Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:171-178
  3. Tozaki M, Fukuda K. High-spatial-resolution MRI of non-masslike breast lesions: interpretation model based on BI-RADS MRI descriptors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:330-337
  4. Morakkabati-Spitz N, Leutner C, Schild H, Traeber F, Kuhl C. Diagnostic usefulness of segmental and linear enhancement in dynamic breast MRI. Eur Radiol 2005;15:2010-2017
  5. Thomassin-Naggara I, Trop I, Chopier J, David J, Lalonde L, Darai E, et al. Nonmasslike enhancement at breast MR imaging: the added value of mammography and US for lesion categorization. Radiology 2011;261:69-79
  6. Perlet C, Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Heinig A, Sittek H, Casselman J, Anderson I, et al. Magnetic resonance-guided, vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: results from a European multicenter study of 538 lesions. Cancer 2006;106:982-990
  7. Floery D, Helbich TH. MRI-Guided percutaneous biopsy of breast lesions: materials, techniques, success rates, and management in patients with suspected radiologic-pathologic mismatch. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006;14:411-425, viii
  8. Kuhl C. The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology 2007;244:356-378
  9. Leung JW. Utility of second-look ultrasound in the evaluation of MRI-detected breast lesions. Semin Roentgenol 2011;46:260-274
  10. Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB. Operator dependence of physician-performed whole-breast US: lesion detection and characterization. Radiology 2006;241:355-365
  11. Shin HJ, Kim HH, Cha JH. Current status of automated breast ultrasonography. Ultrasonography 2015;34:165-172
  12. Meng Z, Chen C, Zhu Y, Zhang S, Wei C, Hu B, et al. Diagnostic performance of the automated breast volume scanner: a systematic review of inter-rater reliability/agreement and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy for differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions. Eur Radiol 2015;25:3638-3647
  13. Sim LS, Hendriks JH, Bult P, Fook-Chong SM. US correlation for MRI-detected breast lesions in women with familial risk of breast cancer. Clin Radiol 2005;60:801-806
  14. Candelaria R, Fornage BD. Second-look US examination of MR-detected breast lesions. J Clin Ultrasound 2011;39:115-121
  15. Newburg AR, Chhor CM, Young Lin LL, Heller SL, Gillman J, Toth HK, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-directed ultrasound imaging of non-mass enhancement in the breast: outcomes and frequency of malignancy. J Ultrasound Med 2017;36:493-504
  16. Carbognin G, Girardi V, Calciolari C, Brandalise A, Bonetti F, Russo A, et al. Utility of second-look ultrasound in the management of incidental enhancing lesions detected by breast MR imaging. Radiol Med 2010;115:1234-1245
  17. Demartini WB, Eby PR, Peacock S, Lehman CD. Utility of targeted sonography for breast lesions that were suspicious on MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192:1128-1134
  18. Meissnitzer M, Dershaw DD, Lee CH, Morris EA. Targeted ultrasound of the breast in women with abnormal MRI findings for whom biopsy has been recommended. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:1025-1029
  19. Laguna AD, Arranz SJ, Checa VQ, Roca SA, Jimenez DE, Oliver-Goldaracena J. Sonographic findings of additional malignant lesions in breast carcinoma seen by second look ultrasound. J Clin Imaging Sci 2011;1:34
  20. Mendelson EB, Bohm-Velez M, Berg WA, Whitman GJ, Feldman MI, Madjar H, et al. ACR BI-RADS(R) ultrasound. In: American College of Radiology. ACR BI-RADS(R) atlas, breast imaging reporting and data system. Reston: American College of Radiology, 2013:128-131
  21. Sickles EA, D'Orsi CJ, Bassett LW, Appleton CM, Berg WA, Burnside ES, et al. ACR BI-RADS(R) mammography. In: American College of Radiology, eds. ACR BI-RADS(R) atlas, breast imaging reporting and data system. Reston: American College of Radiology, 2013:13-120
  22. Sakamoto N, Tozaki M, Higa K, Tsunoda Y, Ogawa T, Abe S, et al. Categorization of non-mass-like breast lesions detected by MRI. Breast Cancer 2008;15:241-246
  23. Baltzer PA, Benndorf M, Dietzel M, Gajda M, Runnebaum IB, Kaiser WA. False-positive findings at contrast-enhanced breast MRI: a BI-RADS descriptor study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:1658-1663
  24. Hsu HH, Chang TH, Chou YC, Peng YJ, Ko KH, Chang WC, et al. Breast nonmass enhancement detected with MRI: uility and lesion characterization with second-look ultrasonography. Breast J 2015;21:579-587
  25. Spick C, Baltzer PA. Diagnostic utility of second-look US for breast lesions identified at MR imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 2014;273:401-409
  26. Girometti R, Zanotel M, Londero V, Bazzocchi M, Zuiani C. Comparison between automated breast volume scanner (ABVS) versus hand-held ultrasound as a second look procedure after magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 2017;27:3767-3775
  27. Kim Y, Kang BJ, Kim SH, Lee EJ. Prospective study comparing two second-look ultrasound techniques: handheld ultrasound and an automated breast volume scanner. J Ultrasound Med 2016;35:2103-2112
  28. Chae EY, Shin HJ, Kim HJ, Yoo H, Baek S, Cha JH, et al. Diagnostic performance of automated breast ultrasound as a replacement for a hand-held second-look ultrasound for breast lesions detected initially on magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol 2013;39:2246-2254
  29. Halshtok-Neiman O, Shalmon A, Rundstein A, Servadio Y, Gotleib M, Sklair-Levy M. Use of automated breast volumetric sonography as a second-look tool for findings in breast magnetic resonance imaging. Isr Med Assoc J 2015;17:410-413
  30. Abe H, Schmidt RA, Shah RN, Shimauchi A, Kulkarni K, Sennett CA, et al. MR-directed ("Second-Look") ultrasound examination for breast lesions detected initially on MRI: MR and sonographic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:370-377
  31. LaTrenta LR, Menell JH, Morris EA, Abramson AF, Dershaw DD, Liberman L. Breast lesions detected with MR imaging: utility and histopathologic importance of identification with US. Radiology 2003;227:856-861