4.5 Article

BREAST ELASTICITY IMAGING TECHNIQUES: COMPARISON OF STRAIN ELASTOGRAPHY AND SHEAR-WAVE ELASTOGRAPHY IN THE SAME POPULATION

期刊

ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY
卷 47, 期 1, 页码 104-113

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2020.09.022

关键词

Elasticity imaging techniques; Ultrasonography; Breast cancer

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81471669]
  2. Study Project of Collaborative Innovation Center for Translational Medicine at Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine [TM201618]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aimed to compare the diagnostic performances of SE and SWE combined with conventional ultrasound in differentiating breast lesions. The results showed that conventional ultrasound had the best diagnostic performance. When combined with conventional ultrasound, SWE appeared to have better sensitivity and AUC compared to SE, but there was no statistically significant difference between them.
purpose was to compare the diagnostic performances of strain elastography (SE) and shear-wave elastography (SWE) in differentiating breast lesions by combining with conventional ultrasound (US). A total of 198 patients with 203 breast lesions underwent conventional US, SE and SWE examination using MyLab 90 and Aixplorer US systems. The SE parameters were SEscore, fat-to-lesion ratio, gland-to-lesion ratio, muscle-to-lesion ratio and SEmean, and the SWE parameters were Emax, Emean, Emin and Esd. Conventional US had the best diagnostic performance, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.896. Among all SE parameters, the AUCs of SEscore, fat-to-lesion ratio and SEmean were 0.802, 0.810 and 0.833. For SWE parameters, they were 0.845, 0.746 and 0.845, respectively, for Emax, Emean and Esd. When combined with US, the sensitivity and AUC of SWE seemed to be better than those of SE (96.55% vs. 93.10%, 0.958 vs. 0.947), but no statistically significant difference existed between them. (E-mail: zhousu30@126.com) (C) 2020 World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据