• Indian J Med Res · Aug 2021

    Diagnostic performance of combined use of automated breast volume scanning & hand-held ultrasound for breast lesions.

    • Jialin Liu, Yang Zhou, Jialing Wu, Peng Li, Xinyu Liang, Haonan Duan, Xueqing Wu, Xiukun Hou, and Xiaofeng Li.
    • School of Public Health, Dalian Medical University, Dalian, Liaoning, China.
    • Indian J Med Res. 2021 Aug 1; 154 (2): 347-354.

    Background & ObjectivesBreast cancer being one of the most common malignant tumours among women, diagnostic modalities for early detection of the same become of paramount importance. In this context, the hand-held ultrasound (HHUS) and automated breast volume scanner (ABVS) could provide valuable information for clinicians to diagnose breast diseases. This study aimed to compare and evaluate the diagnostic performance of combined use of HHUS and ABVS for the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions.MethodsA total of 361 female patients, who underwent both HHUS and ABVS examinations were included in this study. ABVS and HHUS images were interpreted using the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). The distributions of the BI-RADS categories and pathology results were shown as specific numbers. Kappa coefficients test (κ) was calculated to compare the diagnostic results amongst the ABVS, HHUS and ABVS combined with HHUS. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of the three diagnostic methods were calculated and their respective diagnostic performance was analyzed by receiver operator characteristic curve.ResultsOf a total of 431 lesions, 153 (35.5%) were malignant and 278 (64.5%) were benign. With respect to the pathology results, the value of κ was 0.713 (P<0.001) for HHUS, κ=0.765 (P<0.001) for ABVS and κ=0.815 (P<0.001) for HHUS+ABVS. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV and NPV for HHUS combined with ABVS were 96.08 (147/153), 88.49 (246/278), 91.18 (393/431), 82.12 (147/179) and 97.62 per cent (246/252) respectively. For HHUS, these were 90.20 (138/153), 84.17 (234/278), 86.31 (372/431), 75.82 (138/182) and 93.98 per cent (234/249) respectively; and for ABVS these were 92.16 (141/153), 87.05 (242/278), 88.86 (383/431), 79.66 (141/177) and 95.28 per cent (242/254), respectively. There was no significant difference amongst these three methods, but the diagnostic performance of HHUS combined with ABVS was better than, or at least equal to, that of HHUS or ABVS alone.Interpretation & ConclusionsThe results of this study suggest that ABVS is a promising and advantageous modality for breast cancer detection. Furthermore, the combination of HHUS and ABVS showed a more comparable diagnostic performance than HHUS or ABVS alone for distinguishing between benign and malignant breast lesions.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.