Dependability of Automated Breast Ultrasound (ABUS) in Assessing Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Category and Size of Malignant Breast Lesions Compared with Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) and Mammography (MG)

He Chen,1 Ming Han,2 Hui Jing,1 Zhao Liu,1 Haitao Shang,1 Qiucheng Wang,1 Wen Cheng1 1Department of Ultrasound, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin City, Heilongjiang Province, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of General Surgery, Heji Hospital of Changzhi Medical College, Changz...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen H, Han M, Jing H, Liu Z, Shang H, Wang Q, Cheng W
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/1241ac7234ea40adb6c8115101b762de
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:1241ac7234ea40adb6c8115101b762de
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:1241ac7234ea40adb6c8115101b762de2021-11-30T18:50:36ZDependability of Automated Breast Ultrasound (ABUS) in Assessing Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Category and Size of Malignant Breast Lesions Compared with Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) and Mammography (MG)1178-7074https://doaj.org/article/1241ac7234ea40adb6c8115101b762de2021-12-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.dovepress.com/dependability-of-automated-breast-ultrasound-abus-in-assessing-breast--peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-IJGMhttps://doaj.org/toc/1178-7074He Chen,1 Ming Han,2 Hui Jing,1 Zhao Liu,1 Haitao Shang,1 Qiucheng Wang,1 Wen Cheng1 1Department of Ultrasound, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin City, Heilongjiang Province, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of General Surgery, Heji Hospital of Changzhi Medical College, Changzhi City, Shanxi Province, People’s Republic of ChinaCorrespondence: Wen Cheng; Qiucheng WangDepartment of Ultrasound, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, No. 150, Haping Road, Nangang District, Harbin City, 150081, Heilongjiang Province, People’s Republic of ChinaTel +86 13313677182; +86 13836134350Fax +86 45185718392Email hrbchengwen@163.com; haerbincss@126.comPurpose: This study aimed to evaluate the dependability of automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) compared with handheld ultrasound (HHUS) and mammography (MG) on the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category and size assessment of malignant breast lesions.Patients and Methods: A total of 344 confirmed malignant lesions were recruited. All participants underwent MG, HHUS, and ABUS examinations. Agreements on the BI-RADS category were evaluated. Lesion size assessed using the three methods was compared with the size of the pathological result as the control. Regarding the four major molecular subtypes, correlation coefficients between size on imaging and pathology were also evaluated.Results: The agreement between ABUS and HHUS on the BI-RADS category was 86.63% (kappa = 0.77), whereas it was 32.22% (kappa = 0.10) between ABUS and MG. Imaging lesion size compared to pathologic lesion size was assessed correctly in 36.92%/52.91% (ABUS), 33.14%/48.84% (HHUS) and 33.44%/43.87% (MG), with the threshold of 3 mm/5 mm, respectively. The correlation coefficient of size of ABUS-Pathology (0.75, Spearman) was statistically higher than that of the MG-Pathology (0.58, Spearman) with P < 0.01, but not different from that of the HHUS-Pathology (0.74, Spearman) with P > 0.05. The correlation coefficient of ABUS-Pathology was statistically higher than that of MG-Pathology in the triple-negative subtype, luminal B subtype, and luminal A subtype (P< 0.01).Conclusion: The agreement between ABUS and HHUS in the BI-RADS category was good, whereas that between ABUS and MG was poor. ABUS and HHUS allowed a more accurate assessment of malignant tumor size compared to MG.Keywords: automated breast ultrasound, hand-held ultrasound, mammography, breast imaging reporting and data system category, size assessmentChen HHan MJing HLiu ZShang HWang QCheng WDove Medical Pressarticleautomated breast ultrasoundhand-held ultrasoundmammographybreast imaging reporting and data system categorysize assessmentMedicine (General)R5-920ENInternational Journal of General Medicine, Vol Volume 14, Pp 9193-9202 (2021)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic automated breast ultrasound
hand-held ultrasound
mammography
breast imaging reporting and data system category
size assessment
Medicine (General)
R5-920
spellingShingle automated breast ultrasound
hand-held ultrasound
mammography
breast imaging reporting and data system category
size assessment
Medicine (General)
R5-920
Chen H
Han M
Jing H
Liu Z
Shang H
Wang Q
Cheng W
Dependability of Automated Breast Ultrasound (ABUS) in Assessing Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Category and Size of Malignant Breast Lesions Compared with Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) and Mammography (MG)
description He Chen,1 Ming Han,2 Hui Jing,1 Zhao Liu,1 Haitao Shang,1 Qiucheng Wang,1 Wen Cheng1 1Department of Ultrasound, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin City, Heilongjiang Province, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of General Surgery, Heji Hospital of Changzhi Medical College, Changzhi City, Shanxi Province, People’s Republic of ChinaCorrespondence: Wen Cheng; Qiucheng WangDepartment of Ultrasound, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, No. 150, Haping Road, Nangang District, Harbin City, 150081, Heilongjiang Province, People’s Republic of ChinaTel +86 13313677182; +86 13836134350Fax +86 45185718392Email hrbchengwen@163.com; haerbincss@126.comPurpose: This study aimed to evaluate the dependability of automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) compared with handheld ultrasound (HHUS) and mammography (MG) on the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category and size assessment of malignant breast lesions.Patients and Methods: A total of 344 confirmed malignant lesions were recruited. All participants underwent MG, HHUS, and ABUS examinations. Agreements on the BI-RADS category were evaluated. Lesion size assessed using the three methods was compared with the size of the pathological result as the control. Regarding the four major molecular subtypes, correlation coefficients between size on imaging and pathology were also evaluated.Results: The agreement between ABUS and HHUS on the BI-RADS category was 86.63% (kappa = 0.77), whereas it was 32.22% (kappa = 0.10) between ABUS and MG. Imaging lesion size compared to pathologic lesion size was assessed correctly in 36.92%/52.91% (ABUS), 33.14%/48.84% (HHUS) and 33.44%/43.87% (MG), with the threshold of 3 mm/5 mm, respectively. The correlation coefficient of size of ABUS-Pathology (0.75, Spearman) was statistically higher than that of the MG-Pathology (0.58, Spearman) with P < 0.01, but not different from that of the HHUS-Pathology (0.74, Spearman) with P > 0.05. The correlation coefficient of ABUS-Pathology was statistically higher than that of MG-Pathology in the triple-negative subtype, luminal B subtype, and luminal A subtype (P< 0.01).Conclusion: The agreement between ABUS and HHUS in the BI-RADS category was good, whereas that between ABUS and MG was poor. ABUS and HHUS allowed a more accurate assessment of malignant tumor size compared to MG.Keywords: automated breast ultrasound, hand-held ultrasound, mammography, breast imaging reporting and data system category, size assessment
format article
author Chen H
Han M
Jing H
Liu Z
Shang H
Wang Q
Cheng W
author_facet Chen H
Han M
Jing H
Liu Z
Shang H
Wang Q
Cheng W
author_sort Chen H
title Dependability of Automated Breast Ultrasound (ABUS) in Assessing Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Category and Size of Malignant Breast Lesions Compared with Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) and Mammography (MG)
title_short Dependability of Automated Breast Ultrasound (ABUS) in Assessing Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Category and Size of Malignant Breast Lesions Compared with Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) and Mammography (MG)
title_full Dependability of Automated Breast Ultrasound (ABUS) in Assessing Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Category and Size of Malignant Breast Lesions Compared with Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) and Mammography (MG)
title_fullStr Dependability of Automated Breast Ultrasound (ABUS) in Assessing Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Category and Size of Malignant Breast Lesions Compared with Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) and Mammography (MG)
title_full_unstemmed Dependability of Automated Breast Ultrasound (ABUS) in Assessing Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Category and Size of Malignant Breast Lesions Compared with Handheld Ultrasound (HHUS) and Mammography (MG)
title_sort dependability of automated breast ultrasound (abus) in assessing breast imaging reporting and data system (bi-rads) category and size of malignant breast lesions compared with handheld ultrasound (hhus) and mammography (mg)
publisher Dove Medical Press
publishDate 2021
url https://doaj.org/article/1241ac7234ea40adb6c8115101b762de
work_keys_str_mv AT chenh dependabilityofautomatedbreastultrasoundabusinassessingbreastimagingreportinganddatasystembiradscategoryandsizeofmalignantbreastlesionscomparedwithhandheldultrasoundhhusandmammographymg
AT hanm dependabilityofautomatedbreastultrasoundabusinassessingbreastimagingreportinganddatasystembiradscategoryandsizeofmalignantbreastlesionscomparedwithhandheldultrasoundhhusandmammographymg
AT jingh dependabilityofautomatedbreastultrasoundabusinassessingbreastimagingreportinganddatasystembiradscategoryandsizeofmalignantbreastlesionscomparedwithhandheldultrasoundhhusandmammographymg
AT liuz dependabilityofautomatedbreastultrasoundabusinassessingbreastimagingreportinganddatasystembiradscategoryandsizeofmalignantbreastlesionscomparedwithhandheldultrasoundhhusandmammographymg
AT shangh dependabilityofautomatedbreastultrasoundabusinassessingbreastimagingreportinganddatasystembiradscategoryandsizeofmalignantbreastlesionscomparedwithhandheldultrasoundhhusandmammographymg
AT wangq dependabilityofautomatedbreastultrasoundabusinassessingbreastimagingreportinganddatasystembiradscategoryandsizeofmalignantbreastlesionscomparedwithhandheldultrasoundhhusandmammographymg
AT chengw dependabilityofautomatedbreastultrasoundabusinassessingbreastimagingreportinganddatasystembiradscategoryandsizeofmalignantbreastlesionscomparedwithhandheldultrasoundhhusandmammographymg
_version_ 1718406305530511360