Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of elastography, conventional ultrasonography (US) and combined conventional US and elastography for differentiation of papillary breast lesions.
Materials and methods
A total of 95 papillary lesions (69 benign, 20 atypical and 6 malignant) in 87 patients were examined with conventional US and elastography. We evaluated conventional US images according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System and internal composition (solid vs. cystic) and elastographic images according to elasticity scores. We compared diagnostic performances of elastography, conventional US and the combined method.
Results
Areas under the receiver-operating curve were 0.794 for elastography, 0.875 for conventional US and 0.787 for the combined method. When the elasticity score cutoff was between 2 and 3, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 100, 55.1, 13 and 100 %, respectively. The combined method showed similar sensitivity (100 vs. 100 %) to and higher specificity (57.3 vs. 5.6 %) than conventional US alone. No significant difference was found in the elasticity scores of cystic papillary lesions according to pathology.
Conclusion
Elastography improved the specificity of conventional US in differentiating between benign or atypical and malignant papillary breast lesions when it was combined with conventional US.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Tavassoli FA. Papillary lesions. In: Tavassoli FA, editor. Pathology of the breast. Norwalk: Appleton & Lange; 1992. p. 193–227.
Ganesan S, Karthik G, Joshi M, Damodaran V. Ultrasound spectrum in intraductal papillary neoplasms of breast. Br J Radiol. 2006;79:843–9.
Kim TH, Kang DK, Kim SY, Lee EJ, Jung YS, Yim H. Sonographic differentiation of benign and malignant papillary lesions of the breast. J Ultrasound Med. 2008;27:75–82.
Shin HJ, Kim HH, Kim SM, Yang HR, Sohn JH, Kwon GY, et al. Papillary lesions of the breast diagnosed at percutaneous sonographically guided biopsy: comparison of sonographic features and biopsy methods. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190:630–6.
Cho N, Moon WK, Park JS, Cha JH, Jang M, Seong MH. Nonpalpable breast masses: evaluation by US elastography. Korean J Radiol. 2008;9:111–8.
Scaperrotta G, Ferranti C, Costa C, Mariani L, Marchesini M, Suman L, et al. Role of sonoelastography in non-palpable breast lesions. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:2381–9.
Garra BS, Cespedes EI, Ophir J, Spratt SR, Zuurbier RA, Magnant CM, et al. Elastography of breast lesions: initial clinical results. Radiology. 1997;202:79–86.
Itoh A, Ueno E, Tohno E, Kamma H, Takahashi H, Shiina T, et al. Breast disease: clinical application of US elastography for diagnosis. Radiology. 2006;239:341–50.
Sohn YM, Kim MJ, Kim EK, Kwak JY, Moon HJ, Kim SJ. Sonographic elastography combined with conventional sonography: how much is it helpful for diagnostic performance? J Ultrasound Med. 2009;28:413–20.
Zhi H, Ou B, Luo BM, Feng X, Wen YL, Yang HY. Comparison of ultrasound elastography, mammography, and sonography in the diagnosis of solid breast lesions. J Ultrasound Med. 2007;26:807–15.
Tan SM, Teh HS, Mancer JF, Poh WT. Improving B mode ultrasound evaluation of breast lesions with real-time ultrasound elastography—a clinical approach. Breast. 2008;17:252–7.
Sewell CW. Pathology of benign and malignant breast disorders. Radiol Clin North Am. 1995;33:1067–80.
Booi RC, Carson PL, O’Donnell M, Richards MS, Rubin JM. Diagnosing cysts with correlation coefficient images from 2-dimensional freehand elastography. J Ultrasound Med. 2007;26:1201–7.
Chiorean AR, Duma MM, Dudea SM, Bolboaca S, Dumitriu D, Eniu D, et al. Typical and unusual sonoelastographic patterns of breast cystic lesions: impact on BI-RADS classification. Ultraschall Med.
Cho N, Moon WK, Chang JM, Kim SJ, Lyou CY, Choi HY. Aliasing artifact depicted on ultrasound (US)-elastography for breast cystic lesions mimicking solid masses. Acta Radiol. 2011;52:3–7.
Mercado CL, Hamele-Bena D, Oken SM, Singer CI, Cangiarella J. Papillary lesions of the breast at percutaneous core-needle biopsy. Radiology. 2006;238:801–8.
Lam WW, Chu WC, Tang AP, Tse G, Ma TK. Role of radiologic features in the management of papillary lesions of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186:1322–7.
Bernik SF, Troob S, Ying BL, Simpson SA, Axelrod DM, Siegel B, et al. Papillary lesions of the breast diagnosed by core needle biopsy: 71 cases with surgical follow-up. Am J Surg. 2009;197:473–8.
Kim MJ, Kim EK, Kwak JY, Son EJ, Park BW, Kim SI, et al. Nonmalignant papillary lesions of the breast at US-guided directional vacuum-assisted removal: a preliminary report. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:1774–83.
Liberman L, Bracero N, Vuolo MA, Dershaw DD, Morris EA, Abramson AF, et al. Percutaneous large-core biopsy of papillary breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172:331–7.
Youk JH, Kim EK, Kwak JY, Son EJ, Park BW, Kim SI. Benign papilloma without atypia diagnosed at US-guided 14-gauge core-needle biopsy: clinical and US features predictive of upgrade to malignancy. Radiology. 2011;258:81–8.
Chang JM, Moon WK, Cho N, Han W, Noh DY, Park IA, et al. Risk of carcinoma after subsequent excision of benign papilloma initially diagnosed with an ultrasound (US)-guided 14-gauge core needle biopsy: a prospective observational study. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:1093–100.
Mercado CL, Hamele-Bena D, Singer C, Koenigsberg T, Pile-Spellman E, Higgins H, et al. Papillary lesions of the breast: evaluation with stereotactic directional vacuum-assisted biopsy. Radiology. 2001;221:650–5.
Rosen EL, Bentley RC, Baker JA, Soo MS. Imaging-guided core needle biopsy of papillary lesions of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:1185–92.
Brookes MJ, Bourke AG. Radiological appearances of papillary breast lesions. Clin Radiol. 2008;63:1265–73.
Bode MK, Rissanen T, Apaja-Sarkkinen M. Ultrasonography-guided core needle biopsy in differential diagnosis of papillary breast tumors. Acta Radiol. 2009;50:722–9.
Kil WH, Cho EY, Kim JH, Nam SJ, Yang JH. Is surgical excision necessary in benign papillary lesions initially diagnosed at core biopsy? Breast. 2008;17:258–62.
Renshaw AA, Derhagopian RP, Tizol-Blanco DM, Gould EW. Papillomas and atypical papillomas in breast core needle biopsy specimens: risk of carcinoma in subsequent excision. Am J Clin Pathol. 2004;122:217–21.
Chang JM, Han W, Moon WK, Cho N, Noh DY, Park IA, et al. Papillary lesions initially diagnosed at ultrasound-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: rate of malignancy based on subsequent surgical excision. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:2506–14.
Zografos GC, Zagouri F, Sergentanis TN, Nonni A, Michalopoulos NV, Kontogianni P, et al. Diagnosing papillary lesions using vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: should conservative or surgical management follow? Onkologie. 2008;31:653–6.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Choi, J.J., Kang, B.J., Kim, S.H. et al. Role of sonographic elastography in the differential diagnosis of papillary lesions in breast. Jpn J Radiol 30, 422–429 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-012-0070-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-012-0070-y