Cargando…

Does the radiologist need to rescan the breast lesion to validate the final BI-RADS US assessment made on the static images in the diagnostic setting?

Purpose: To assess whether radiologist needs to rescan the breast lesion to validate the final American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) ultrasonography (US) assessment made on the static images in the diagnostic setting. Patients and methods: Image data...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hu, Yue, Mei, Jingsi, Jiang, Xiaofang, Gu, Ran, Liu, Fengtao, Yang, Yaping, Wang, Hongli, Shen, Shiyu, Jia, Haixia, Liu, Qiang, Gong, Chang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6535425/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31191021
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S198435
_version_ 1783421568706150400
author Hu, Yue
Mei, Jingsi
Jiang, Xiaofang
Gu, Ran
Liu, Fengtao
Yang, Yaping
Wang, Hongli
Shen, Shiyu
Jia, Haixia
Liu, Qiang
Gong, Chang
author_facet Hu, Yue
Mei, Jingsi
Jiang, Xiaofang
Gu, Ran
Liu, Fengtao
Yang, Yaping
Wang, Hongli
Shen, Shiyu
Jia, Haixia
Liu, Qiang
Gong, Chang
author_sort Hu, Yue
collection PubMed
description Purpose: To assess whether radiologist needs to rescan the breast lesion to validate the final American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) ultrasonography (US) assessment made on the static images in the diagnostic setting. Patients and methods: Image data on 1,070 patients with 1,070 category 3–5 breast lesions with a pathological diagnosis scanned between January and June 2016 were included. Both real-time and static image assessments were acquired for each lesion. The diagnostic performance was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The positive predictive values (PPVs) of each category in the two groups were calculated according to the ACR BI-RADS manual and compared. Kappas were determined for agreement on two assessment approaches. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and negative predictive value for real-time US were 98.9%, 58.2%, 44.8% and 99.4%, and for static images were 98.9%, 57.1%, 44.1% and 99.3%, respectively. The performance of the two groups was not significantly different (areas under ROCs: 0.786 vs 0.780, P=0.566) if the final assessment was only dichotomized as negative (category 3) and positive (categories 4 and 5). All PPVs of each category for each assessment were within the reference range provided by the ACR in 2013 except subcategory 4B (reference range: >10% and ≤50%) of static image evaluation, which was also significantly higher than that of real-time assessment (54.8% vs 40.7%, P=0.037). The overall agreement of the two approaches was moderate (κ=0.43–0.56 according to different detailed assessment). Conclusion: Both static image and real-time assessment had similar diagnostic performance if only the treatment recommendations were considered, that is, follow-up or biopsy. However, as for subcategory 4B lesions without obviously benign or malignant US features, real-time scanning by the interpreter is recommended to obtain a more accurate BI-RADS assessment after assessing static images.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6535425
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65354252019-06-12 Does the radiologist need to rescan the breast lesion to validate the final BI-RADS US assessment made on the static images in the diagnostic setting? Hu, Yue Mei, Jingsi Jiang, Xiaofang Gu, Ran Liu, Fengtao Yang, Yaping Wang, Hongli Shen, Shiyu Jia, Haixia Liu, Qiang Gong, Chang Cancer Manag Res Original Research Purpose: To assess whether radiologist needs to rescan the breast lesion to validate the final American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) ultrasonography (US) assessment made on the static images in the diagnostic setting. Patients and methods: Image data on 1,070 patients with 1,070 category 3–5 breast lesions with a pathological diagnosis scanned between January and June 2016 were included. Both real-time and static image assessments were acquired for each lesion. The diagnostic performance was evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The positive predictive values (PPVs) of each category in the two groups were calculated according to the ACR BI-RADS manual and compared. Kappas were determined for agreement on two assessment approaches. Results: The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and negative predictive value for real-time US were 98.9%, 58.2%, 44.8% and 99.4%, and for static images were 98.9%, 57.1%, 44.1% and 99.3%, respectively. The performance of the two groups was not significantly different (areas under ROCs: 0.786 vs 0.780, P=0.566) if the final assessment was only dichotomized as negative (category 3) and positive (categories 4 and 5). All PPVs of each category for each assessment were within the reference range provided by the ACR in 2013 except subcategory 4B (reference range: >10% and ≤50%) of static image evaluation, which was also significantly higher than that of real-time assessment (54.8% vs 40.7%, P=0.037). The overall agreement of the two approaches was moderate (κ=0.43–0.56 according to different detailed assessment). Conclusion: Both static image and real-time assessment had similar diagnostic performance if only the treatment recommendations were considered, that is, follow-up or biopsy. However, as for subcategory 4B lesions without obviously benign or malignant US features, real-time scanning by the interpreter is recommended to obtain a more accurate BI-RADS assessment after assessing static images. Dove 2019-05-22 /pmc/articles/PMC6535425/ /pubmed/31191021 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S198435 Text en © 2019 Hu et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Hu, Yue
Mei, Jingsi
Jiang, Xiaofang
Gu, Ran
Liu, Fengtao
Yang, Yaping
Wang, Hongli
Shen, Shiyu
Jia, Haixia
Liu, Qiang
Gong, Chang
Does the radiologist need to rescan the breast lesion to validate the final BI-RADS US assessment made on the static images in the diagnostic setting?
title Does the radiologist need to rescan the breast lesion to validate the final BI-RADS US assessment made on the static images in the diagnostic setting?
title_full Does the radiologist need to rescan the breast lesion to validate the final BI-RADS US assessment made on the static images in the diagnostic setting?
title_fullStr Does the radiologist need to rescan the breast lesion to validate the final BI-RADS US assessment made on the static images in the diagnostic setting?
title_full_unstemmed Does the radiologist need to rescan the breast lesion to validate the final BI-RADS US assessment made on the static images in the diagnostic setting?
title_short Does the radiologist need to rescan the breast lesion to validate the final BI-RADS US assessment made on the static images in the diagnostic setting?
title_sort does the radiologist need to rescan the breast lesion to validate the final bi-rads us assessment made on the static images in the diagnostic setting?
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6535425/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31191021
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S198435
work_keys_str_mv AT huyue doestheradiologistneedtorescanthebreastlesiontovalidatethefinalbiradsusassessmentmadeonthestaticimagesinthediagnosticsetting
AT meijingsi doestheradiologistneedtorescanthebreastlesiontovalidatethefinalbiradsusassessmentmadeonthestaticimagesinthediagnosticsetting
AT jiangxiaofang doestheradiologistneedtorescanthebreastlesiontovalidatethefinalbiradsusassessmentmadeonthestaticimagesinthediagnosticsetting
AT guran doestheradiologistneedtorescanthebreastlesiontovalidatethefinalbiradsusassessmentmadeonthestaticimagesinthediagnosticsetting
AT liufengtao doestheradiologistneedtorescanthebreastlesiontovalidatethefinalbiradsusassessmentmadeonthestaticimagesinthediagnosticsetting
AT yangyaping doestheradiologistneedtorescanthebreastlesiontovalidatethefinalbiradsusassessmentmadeonthestaticimagesinthediagnosticsetting
AT wanghongli doestheradiologistneedtorescanthebreastlesiontovalidatethefinalbiradsusassessmentmadeonthestaticimagesinthediagnosticsetting
AT shenshiyu doestheradiologistneedtorescanthebreastlesiontovalidatethefinalbiradsusassessmentmadeonthestaticimagesinthediagnosticsetting
AT jiahaixia doestheradiologistneedtorescanthebreastlesiontovalidatethefinalbiradsusassessmentmadeonthestaticimagesinthediagnosticsetting
AT liuqiang doestheradiologistneedtorescanthebreastlesiontovalidatethefinalbiradsusassessmentmadeonthestaticimagesinthediagnosticsetting
AT gongchang doestheradiologistneedtorescanthebreastlesiontovalidatethefinalbiradsusassessmentmadeonthestaticimagesinthediagnosticsetting