Cargando…

Comparison of (99m)Tc-MIBI scintigraphy, ultrasound, and mammography for the diagnosis of BI-RADS 4 category lesions

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the diagnostic efficacy of Breast-specific gamma imaging (BSGI) in Chinese women with BI-RADS 4 category lesions and to compare this efficacy to that of ultrasound/mammography. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 177 women that had undergone BSGI of BI-R...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Hongbiao, Zhan, Hongwei, Sun, Da
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7245809/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32448217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-06938-7
_version_ 1783537821858922496
author Liu, Hongbiao
Zhan, Hongwei
Sun, Da
author_facet Liu, Hongbiao
Zhan, Hongwei
Sun, Da
author_sort Liu, Hongbiao
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the diagnostic efficacy of Breast-specific gamma imaging (BSGI) in Chinese women with BI-RADS 4 category lesions and to compare this efficacy to that of ultrasound/mammography. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 177 women that had undergone BSGI of BI-RADS 4 category lesions originally detected via ultrasound and/or mammography. RESULTS: Of these 177 cases, 117 (66.1%) were malignant lesions and 60 (33.9%) were benign. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values of BSGI were 94.9% (111/117), 78.3% (47/60), 89.5% (111/124), and 88.7% (47/53), respectively. The specificity and positive predictive values for mammography were 48.3% (29/60) and 77.5% (107/138), while for ultrasound they were 53.3% (32/60) and 79.6% (109/137), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of BSGI for the detection of lesions ≤1 cm in size were 90.9% (10/11) and 88.0% (22/25), respectively, while for breast lesions >1 cm in size these values were 94.3% (100/106) and 71.4% (25/35), respectively. In addition, BSGI sensitivity and specificity values for dense breast tissue were 94.0% (79/84) and 78.0% (39/50), respectively, whereas for non-dense breast tissue these vales were 97.0% (32/33) and 80.0% (8/10), respectively. The sensitivity of BSGI for invasive ductal carcinomas (IDC) and ductal carcinomas in situ (DCIS) was 98.9% (95/96) and 75.0% (9/12), respectively. The tumor to normal tissue ratio of BSGI for malignant lesions was significantly higher than for benign lesions (2.18 ± 1.17 vs 1.66 ± 0.40, t = 7.56, P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that BSGI is highly sensitive for the detection of such lesions, achieving good positive/negative predictive values. This suggests that for IDC in particular, BSGI is superior to ultrasound and mammography for the diagnosis of BI-RADS 4 category lesions, although this was less apparent for the diagnosis of DCIS lesions. BSGI exhibited excellent performance in dense breast tissue and for the detection of lesions ≤1 cm in size.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7245809
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72458092020-06-01 Comparison of (99m)Tc-MIBI scintigraphy, ultrasound, and mammography for the diagnosis of BI-RADS 4 category lesions Liu, Hongbiao Zhan, Hongwei Sun, Da BMC Cancer Research Article BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the diagnostic efficacy of Breast-specific gamma imaging (BSGI) in Chinese women with BI-RADS 4 category lesions and to compare this efficacy to that of ultrasound/mammography. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 177 women that had undergone BSGI of BI-RADS 4 category lesions originally detected via ultrasound and/or mammography. RESULTS: Of these 177 cases, 117 (66.1%) were malignant lesions and 60 (33.9%) were benign. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values of BSGI were 94.9% (111/117), 78.3% (47/60), 89.5% (111/124), and 88.7% (47/53), respectively. The specificity and positive predictive values for mammography were 48.3% (29/60) and 77.5% (107/138), while for ultrasound they were 53.3% (32/60) and 79.6% (109/137), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of BSGI for the detection of lesions ≤1 cm in size were 90.9% (10/11) and 88.0% (22/25), respectively, while for breast lesions >1 cm in size these values were 94.3% (100/106) and 71.4% (25/35), respectively. In addition, BSGI sensitivity and specificity values for dense breast tissue were 94.0% (79/84) and 78.0% (39/50), respectively, whereas for non-dense breast tissue these vales were 97.0% (32/33) and 80.0% (8/10), respectively. The sensitivity of BSGI for invasive ductal carcinomas (IDC) and ductal carcinomas in situ (DCIS) was 98.9% (95/96) and 75.0% (9/12), respectively. The tumor to normal tissue ratio of BSGI for malignant lesions was significantly higher than for benign lesions (2.18 ± 1.17 vs 1.66 ± 0.40, t = 7.56, P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that BSGI is highly sensitive for the detection of such lesions, achieving good positive/negative predictive values. This suggests that for IDC in particular, BSGI is superior to ultrasound and mammography for the diagnosis of BI-RADS 4 category lesions, although this was less apparent for the diagnosis of DCIS lesions. BSGI exhibited excellent performance in dense breast tissue and for the detection of lesions ≤1 cm in size. BioMed Central 2020-05-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7245809/ /pubmed/32448217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-06938-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Liu, Hongbiao
Zhan, Hongwei
Sun, Da
Comparison of (99m)Tc-MIBI scintigraphy, ultrasound, and mammography for the diagnosis of BI-RADS 4 category lesions
title Comparison of (99m)Tc-MIBI scintigraphy, ultrasound, and mammography for the diagnosis of BI-RADS 4 category lesions
title_full Comparison of (99m)Tc-MIBI scintigraphy, ultrasound, and mammography for the diagnosis of BI-RADS 4 category lesions
title_fullStr Comparison of (99m)Tc-MIBI scintigraphy, ultrasound, and mammography for the diagnosis of BI-RADS 4 category lesions
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of (99m)Tc-MIBI scintigraphy, ultrasound, and mammography for the diagnosis of BI-RADS 4 category lesions
title_short Comparison of (99m)Tc-MIBI scintigraphy, ultrasound, and mammography for the diagnosis of BI-RADS 4 category lesions
title_sort comparison of (99m)tc-mibi scintigraphy, ultrasound, and mammography for the diagnosis of bi-rads 4 category lesions
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7245809/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32448217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-06938-7
work_keys_str_mv AT liuhongbiao comparisonof99mtcmibiscintigraphyultrasoundandmammographyforthediagnosisofbirads4categorylesions
AT zhanhongwei comparisonof99mtcmibiscintigraphyultrasoundandmammographyforthediagnosisofbirads4categorylesions
AT sunda comparisonof99mtcmibiscintigraphyultrasoundandmammographyforthediagnosisofbirads4categorylesions