Cargando…

Comparison of One- and Two-Region of Interest Strain Elastography Measurements in the Differential Diagnosis of Breast Masses

OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic performance and interobserver variability of strain ratio obtained from one or two regions of interest (ROI) on breast elastography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April to May 2016, 140 breast masses in 140 patients who underwent conventional ultrasonography (US) w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Park, Hee Jeong, Kim, Sun Mi, Yun, Bo La, Jang, Mijung, Kim, Bohyoung, Lee, Soo Hyun, Ahn, Hye Shin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society of Radiology 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7082658/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32193891
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2019.0479
_version_ 1783508390589235200
author Park, Hee Jeong
Kim, Sun Mi
Yun, Bo La
Jang, Mijung
Kim, Bohyoung
Lee, Soo Hyun
Ahn, Hye Shin
author_facet Park, Hee Jeong
Kim, Sun Mi
Yun, Bo La
Jang, Mijung
Kim, Bohyoung
Lee, Soo Hyun
Ahn, Hye Shin
author_sort Park, Hee Jeong
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic performance and interobserver variability of strain ratio obtained from one or two regions of interest (ROI) on breast elastography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April to May 2016, 140 breast masses in 140 patients who underwent conventional ultrasonography (US) with strain elastography followed by US-guided biopsy were evaluated. Three experienced breast radiologists reviewed recorded US and elastography images, measured strain ratios, and categorized them according to the American College of Radiology breast imaging reporting and data system lexicon. Strain ratio was obtained using the 1-ROI method (one ROI drawn on the target mass), and the 2-ROI method (one ROI in the target mass and another in reference fat tissue). The diagnostic performance of the three radiologists among datasets and optimal cut-off values for strain ratios were evaluated. Interobserver variability of strain ratio for each ROI method was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient values, Bland–Altman plots, and coefficients of variation. RESULTS: Compared to US alone, US combined with the strain ratio measured using either ROI method significantly improved specificity, positive predictive value, accuracy, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) (all p values < 0.05). Strain ratio obtained using the 1-ROI method showed higher interobserver agreement between the three radiologists without a significant difference in AUC for differentiating breast cancer when the optimal strain ratio cut-off value was used, compared with the 2-ROI method (AUC: 0.788 vs. 0.783, 0.693 vs. 0.715, and 0.691 vs. 0.686, respectively, all p values > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Strain ratios obtained using the 1-ROI method showed higher interobserver agreement without a significant difference in AUC, compared to those obtained using the 2-ROI method. Considering that the 1-ROI method can reduce performers' efforts, it could have an important role in improving the diagnostic performance of breast US by enabling consistent management of breast lesions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7082658
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher The Korean Society of Radiology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70826582020-04-01 Comparison of One- and Two-Region of Interest Strain Elastography Measurements in the Differential Diagnosis of Breast Masses Park, Hee Jeong Kim, Sun Mi Yun, Bo La Jang, Mijung Kim, Bohyoung Lee, Soo Hyun Ahn, Hye Shin Korean J Radiol Breast Imaging OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic performance and interobserver variability of strain ratio obtained from one or two regions of interest (ROI) on breast elastography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April to May 2016, 140 breast masses in 140 patients who underwent conventional ultrasonography (US) with strain elastography followed by US-guided biopsy were evaluated. Three experienced breast radiologists reviewed recorded US and elastography images, measured strain ratios, and categorized them according to the American College of Radiology breast imaging reporting and data system lexicon. Strain ratio was obtained using the 1-ROI method (one ROI drawn on the target mass), and the 2-ROI method (one ROI in the target mass and another in reference fat tissue). The diagnostic performance of the three radiologists among datasets and optimal cut-off values for strain ratios were evaluated. Interobserver variability of strain ratio for each ROI method was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient values, Bland–Altman plots, and coefficients of variation. RESULTS: Compared to US alone, US combined with the strain ratio measured using either ROI method significantly improved specificity, positive predictive value, accuracy, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) (all p values < 0.05). Strain ratio obtained using the 1-ROI method showed higher interobserver agreement between the three radiologists without a significant difference in AUC for differentiating breast cancer when the optimal strain ratio cut-off value was used, compared with the 2-ROI method (AUC: 0.788 vs. 0.783, 0.693 vs. 0.715, and 0.691 vs. 0.686, respectively, all p values > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Strain ratios obtained using the 1-ROI method showed higher interobserver agreement without a significant difference in AUC, compared to those obtained using the 2-ROI method. Considering that the 1-ROI method can reduce performers' efforts, it could have an important role in improving the diagnostic performance of breast US by enabling consistent management of breast lesions. The Korean Society of Radiology 2020-04 2020-03-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7082658/ /pubmed/32193891 http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2019.0479 Text en Copyright © 2020 The Korean Society of Radiology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Breast Imaging
Park, Hee Jeong
Kim, Sun Mi
Yun, Bo La
Jang, Mijung
Kim, Bohyoung
Lee, Soo Hyun
Ahn, Hye Shin
Comparison of One- and Two-Region of Interest Strain Elastography Measurements in the Differential Diagnosis of Breast Masses
title Comparison of One- and Two-Region of Interest Strain Elastography Measurements in the Differential Diagnosis of Breast Masses
title_full Comparison of One- and Two-Region of Interest Strain Elastography Measurements in the Differential Diagnosis of Breast Masses
title_fullStr Comparison of One- and Two-Region of Interest Strain Elastography Measurements in the Differential Diagnosis of Breast Masses
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of One- and Two-Region of Interest Strain Elastography Measurements in the Differential Diagnosis of Breast Masses
title_short Comparison of One- and Two-Region of Interest Strain Elastography Measurements in the Differential Diagnosis of Breast Masses
title_sort comparison of one- and two-region of interest strain elastography measurements in the differential diagnosis of breast masses
topic Breast Imaging
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7082658/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32193891
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2019.0479
work_keys_str_mv AT parkheejeong comparisonofoneandtworegionofintereststrainelastographymeasurementsinthedifferentialdiagnosisofbreastmasses
AT kimsunmi comparisonofoneandtworegionofintereststrainelastographymeasurementsinthedifferentialdiagnosisofbreastmasses
AT yunbola comparisonofoneandtworegionofintereststrainelastographymeasurementsinthedifferentialdiagnosisofbreastmasses
AT jangmijung comparisonofoneandtworegionofintereststrainelastographymeasurementsinthedifferentialdiagnosisofbreastmasses
AT kimbohyoung comparisonofoneandtworegionofintereststrainelastographymeasurementsinthedifferentialdiagnosisofbreastmasses
AT leesoohyun comparisonofoneandtworegionofintereststrainelastographymeasurementsinthedifferentialdiagnosisofbreastmasses
AT ahnhyeshin comparisonofoneandtworegionofintereststrainelastographymeasurementsinthedifferentialdiagnosisofbreastmasses