4.5 Article

QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF KELOIDS USING ULTRASOUND SHEAR WAVE ELASTOGRAPHY

Journal

ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY
Volume 46, Issue 5, Pages 1169-1178

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2020.01.010

Keywords

Keloid; Shear wave elastography; Ultrasound

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81671696]
  2. Sichuan Science and Technology Program [2019 YFS0219]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study was aimed at investigating the value of shear wave elastography (SWE) in quantitative evaluation of keloids. A total of 87 patients with 139 keloids were enrolled. Vancouver scar scale (VSS) scores were recorded. Thickness and blood flow grade were evaluated using high-frequency ultrasound. Skin stiffness (mean speed of shear wave,1 was evaluated using SWE in both transverse and longitudinal sections. All eau, measurements were performed in both keloids and site-matched unaffected skin (normal controls). The reliabil-ity of measurements was evaluated using intra- and inter-class correlation coefficients by two observers. Inter-and intra-observer repeatability was excellent (correlation coefficient > 0.99, p < 0.01). The SWE results revealed a significant increase in C(mean )in keloids (p < 0.001) compared with the normal controls. Cmean in the longitudinal section was greater than that in the transverse section for keloids (p < 0.001). C-mean was highly positively correlated with VSS score (r = 0.904, p < 0.001), moderately positively correlated with thickness (r = 0.490, p < 0.001) and less positively correlated with blood flow (r = 0.231, p < 0.01). This non-invasive, tolerable and convenient imaging technique could be an effective tool for objectively evaluating keloid stiffness in the future, thus laying a foundation for the treatment and evaluation of keloids. (C) 2020 World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available