Differentiating benign from malignant solid breast masses: value of shear wave elastography according to lesion stiffness combined with greyscale ultrasound according to BI-RADS classification

Background:The aim of this study was to assess the performance of shear wave elastography combined with BI-RADS classification of greyscale ultrasound images for benign/malignant differentiation in a large group of patients.Methods:One hundred and seventy-five consecutive patients with solid breast masses on routine ultrasonography undergoing percutaneous biopsy had the greyscale findings classified according to the American College of Radiology BI-RADS. The mean elasticity values from four shear wave images were obtained.Results:For mean elasticity vs greyscale BI-RADS, the performance results against histology were sensitivity: 95% vs 95%, specificity: 77% vs 69%, Positive Predictive Value (PPV): 88% vs 84%, Negative Predictive Value (NPV): 90% vs 91%, and accuracy: 89% vs 86% (all P>0.05). The results for the combination (positive result from either modality counted as malignant) were sensitivity 100%, specificity 61%, PPV 82%, NPV 100%, and accuracy 86%. The combination of BI-RADS greyscale and shear wave elastography yielded superior sensitivity to BI-RADS alone (P=0.03) or shear wave alone (P=0.03). The NPV was superior in combination compared with either alone (BI-RADS P=0.01 and shear wave P=0.02).Conclusion:Together, BI-RADS assessment of greyscale ultrasound images and shear wave ultrasound elastography are extremely sensitive for detection of malignancy.

[1]  Julie Cooke,et al.  CLINICAL GUIDELINES FOR BREAST CANCER SCREENING ASSESSMENT , 2001 .

[2]  Duane D. Meixner,et al.  Breast lesions: evaluation with US strain imaging--clinical experience of multiple observers. , 2006, Radiology.

[3]  P. Langenberg,et al.  Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: inter- and intraobserver variability in feature analysis and final assessment. , 2000, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[4]  E. Fleury,et al.  New elastographic classification of breast lesions during and after compression. , 2009, Diagnostic and interventional radiology.

[5]  Jason P Fine,et al.  Differentiating Benign from Malignant Solid Breast Masses with US Strain Imaging 1 , 2007 .

[6]  M. Fink,et al.  Breast lesions: quantitative elastography with supersonic shear imaging--preliminary results. , 2010, Radiology.

[7]  David O. Cosgrove,et al.  Shear wave elastography for breast masses is highly reproducible , 2011, European Radiology.

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

[9]  P. Burrows,et al.  Ultrasound diagnosis of fibroadenoma - is biopsy always necessary? , 2008, Clinical radiology.

[10]  T. Matsumura,et al.  Breast disease: clinical application of US elastography for diagnosis. , 2006, Radiology.

[11]  J. M. Pearson,et al.  Criteria for the safe avoidance of needle sampling in young women with solid breast masses. , 2010, Clinical radiology.

[12]  Yulei Jiang,et al.  BI-RADS data should not be used to estimate ROC curves. , 2010, Radiology.

[13]  E. Sedgwick.  The breast ultrasound lexicon: breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). , 2011, Seminars in roentgenology.

[14]  M Heller,et al.  Breast ultrasound elastography--results of 193 breast lesions in a prospective study with histopathologic correlation. , 2011, European journal of radiology.

[15]  D. Noh,et al.  Clinical application of shear wave elastography (SWE) in the diagnosis of benign and malignant breast diseases , 2011, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[16]  Kim Thomson,et al.  Quantitative shear wave ultrasound elastography: initial experience in solid breast masses , 2010, Breast Cancer Research.

[17]  W. Svensson,et al.  Shear-wave elastography improves the specificity of breast US: the BE1 multinational study of 939 masses. , 2012, Radiology.