Diagnostic algorithm: how to make use of new 2D, 3D and 4D ultrasound technologies in breast imaging.

The aim of this publication is to present a time saving diagnostic algorithm consisting of two-dimensional (2D), three-dimensional (3D) and four-dimensional (4D) ultrasound (US) technologies. This algorithm of eight steps combines different imaging modalities and render modes which allow a step by step analysis of 2D, 3D and 4D diagnostic criteria. Advanced breast US systems with broadband high frequency linear transducers, full digital data management and high resolution are the actual basis for two-dimensional breast US studies in order to detect early breast cancer (step 1). The continuous developments of 2D US technologies including contrast resolution imaging (CRI) and speckle reduction imaging (SRI) have a direct influence on the high quality of three-dimensional and four-dimensional presentation of anatomical breast structures and pathological details. The diagnostic options provided by static 3D volume datasets according to US BI-RADS analogue assessment, concerning lesion shape, orientation, margin, echogenic rim sign, lesion echogenicity, acoustic transmission, associated calcifications, 3D criteria of the coronal plane, surrounding tissue composition (step 2) and lesion vascularity (step 6) are discussed. Static 3D datasets offer the combination of long axes distance measurements and volume calculations, which are the basis for an accurate follow-up in BI-RADS II and BI-RADS III lesions (step 3). Real time 4D volume contrast imaging (VCI) is able to demonstrate tissue elasticity (step 5). Glass body rendering is a static 3D tool which presents greyscale and colour information to study the vascularity and the vascular architecture of a lesion (step 6). Tomographic ultrasound imaging (TUI) is used for a slice by slice documentation in different investigation planes (A-,B- or C-plane) (steps 4 and 7). The final step 8 uses the panoramic view technique (XTD-View) to document the localisation within the breast and to make the position of a lesion simply reproducible.

[1]  Woo Kyung Moon,et al.  Multifocal, multicentric, and contralateral breast cancers: bilateral whole-breast US in the preoperative evaluation of patients. , 2002, Radiology.

[2]  T. M. Kolb,et al.  Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. , 2002, Radiology.

[3]  M. Schietzel,et al.  [Vascularization of breast tumors: use of ultrasound contrast medium in evaluating tumor entity. Preliminary results]. , 1998, RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin.

[4]  Breast cancer: assessment of vascularity by colour Doppler , 1993, European Radiology.

[5]  C. Bartolozzi,et al.  Comparison of the diagnostic performance of high-frequency ultrasound as a first- or second-line diagnostic tool in non-palpable lesions of the breast , 1997, European Radiology.

[6]  Baudouin Maldague,et al.  Mammography and subsequent whole-breast sonography of nonpalpable breast cancers: the importance of radiologic breast density. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[7]  M V Knopp,et al.  Breast tumors: computer-assisted quantitative assessment with color Doppler US. , 1994, Radiology.

[8]  T. Helbich,et al.  [Ultrasound follow-up of palpable solid, probably benign breast lesions (BI-RADS category III)]. , 2004, RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin.

[9]  J Kettenbach,et al.  Effects of a microbubble contrast agent on breast tumors: computer-assisted quantitative assessment with color Doppler US--early experience. , 1998, Radiology.

[10]  Ruey-Feng Chang,et al.  Solid breast masses: classification with computer-aided analysis of continuous US images obtained with probe compression. , 2005, Radiology.

[11]  J W Sayre,et al.  Benign versus malignant solid breast masses: US differentiation. , 1999, Radiology.

[12]  T. Helbich,et al.  Follow-up of palpable circumscribed noncalcified solid breast masses at mammography and US: can biopsy be averted? , 2004, Radiology.

[13]  M S Soo,et al.  Sonography of solid breast lesions: observer variability of lesion description and assessment. , 1999, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[14]  V. R. McCready,et al.  Microbubble contrast agent for color Doppler US: effect on breast masses. Work in progress. , 1996, Radiology.

[15]  A. Stavros,et al.  Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. , 1995, Radiology.

[16]  Woo Kyung Moon,et al.  Characterization of benign and malignant solid breast masses: comparison of conventional US and tissue harmonic imaging. , 2007, Radiology.

[17]  Tsuyoshi Shiina,et al.  Research and Development in Breast Ultrasound , 2005 .

[18]  Breast ultrasound: new frontiers in imaging? , 2000, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[19]  D. Clevert,et al.  Tissue Harmonic Imaging (THI) zur präoperativen sonographischen Markierung von Mammaherden , 2002 .

[20]  Otmar Scherzer,et al.  A Fast and Robust Algorithm for 2D/3D Panorama Ultrasound Data , 2002, Real Time Imaging.

[21]  W. Buchberger,et al.  Clinically and mammographically occult breast lesions: detection and classification with high-resolution sonography. , 2000, Seminars in ultrasound, CT, and MR.

[22]  D Rotten,et al.  Analysis of normal breast tissue and of solid breast masses using three‐dimensional ultrasound mammography , 1999, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[23]  Soo Young Chung,et al.  Differentiating benign from malignant solid breast masses: comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional US. , 2006, Radiology.

[24]  H. Madjar.  Role of echo enhanced ultrasound in breast mass investigations , 1997 .

[25]  C. Weismann.  Recent Advances in Multidimensional 3D/4D Breast Imaging , 2005 .

[26]  Giorgio Rizzatto,et al.  Towards a more sophisticated use of breast ultrasound , 2001, European Radiology.

[27]  J. Baker,et al.  BI-RADS for sonography: positive and negative predictive values of sonographic features. , 2005, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[28]  D. Watermann,et al.  BI-RADS analoge DEGUM Kriterien von Ultraschallbefunden der Brust - Konsensus des Arbeitskreises Mammasonographie der DEGUM , 2006 .