Limits...
Breast carcinomas: variations in sonoelastographic appearance.

Fleury Ede F, Assunção-Queiros Mdo C, Roveda D - Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press) (2014)

Bottom Line: Scores were compared against histopathologic results, which were divided into two groups, ie, soft lesions (group 1) and hard lesions (group 2).No statistically significant differences were observed according to patient age or largest lesion diameter.False-negative results on sonoelastography were influenced by histologic type of lesion and not by lesion size or patient age.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculdade de Cências Médicas da Santa Casa de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

ABSTRACT

Background: This study assessed factors influencing the sonoelastographic presentation of breast carcinoma.

Methods: A prospective collaborative study was conducted by the Santa Casa de São Paulo and CTC-Center, on 540 breast lesions in women referred for percutaneous breast biopsy. Eighty-four carcinomas showing lesions on ultrasonography were included. These lesions were classified into four sonoelastographic scores, where scores of 1, 2, and 3 were considered false-negative, and a score of 4 was considered true-positive. Scores were compared against histopathologic results, which were divided into two groups, ie, soft lesions (group 1) and hard lesions (group 2). False-negative and true-positive results were also assessed for variation according to patient age and mean lesion diameter.

Results: Of the 84 lesions studied, nine yielded false-negative results on sonoelastography and 75 yielded true-positive results. In terms of histopathologic classification, eight were assigned to group 1 and 76 to group 2. The chi-squared test showed a correlation between sonoelastographic scores and histopathologic lesion type. No statistically significant differences were observed according to patient age or largest lesion diameter.

Conclusion: Our results revealed an association between sonoelastographic presentation of breast lesions and histology. False-negative results on sonoelastography were influenced by histologic type of lesion and not by lesion size or patient age.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Classification used and proposed by authors.Note: Assessment of breast masses during compression and after decompression of breast parenchyma, where scores of 1, 2, and 3 indicate benign masses, and a score of 4 is suspicious for malignancy.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4128690&req=5

f1-bctt-6-135: Classification used and proposed by authors.Note: Assessment of breast masses during compression and after decompression of breast parenchyma, where scores of 1, 2, and 3 indicate benign masses, and a score of 4 is suspicious for malignancy.

Mentions: The elastographic classification adopted a four-point scale according to the color variation during compression and after decompression of the ROI. A score of 1 was assigned to lesions presenting the same color spectrum as the peripheral breast tissue. A score of 2 was assigned to lesions that, after decompression, presented variation to lighter strains of more than 50% of the mass area when compared with the image acquired during compression. A score of 3 was assigned to lesions presenting color variation of less than 50% of the lesion area (between 10% and 50%) after decompression. Finally, a score of 4 was assigned to those lesions showing no relevant color variation during compression and after decompression of the parenchyma, appearing blue in both images (Figure 1).


Breast carcinomas: variations in sonoelastographic appearance.

Fleury Ede F, Assunção-Queiros Mdo C, Roveda D - Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press) (2014)

Classification used and proposed by authors.Note: Assessment of breast masses during compression and after decompression of breast parenchyma, where scores of 1, 2, and 3 indicate benign masses, and a score of 4 is suspicious for malignancy.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4128690&req=5

f1-bctt-6-135: Classification used and proposed by authors.Note: Assessment of breast masses during compression and after decompression of breast parenchyma, where scores of 1, 2, and 3 indicate benign masses, and a score of 4 is suspicious for malignancy.
Mentions: The elastographic classification adopted a four-point scale according to the color variation during compression and after decompression of the ROI. A score of 1 was assigned to lesions presenting the same color spectrum as the peripheral breast tissue. A score of 2 was assigned to lesions that, after decompression, presented variation to lighter strains of more than 50% of the mass area when compared with the image acquired during compression. A score of 3 was assigned to lesions presenting color variation of less than 50% of the lesion area (between 10% and 50%) after decompression. Finally, a score of 4 was assigned to those lesions showing no relevant color variation during compression and after decompression of the parenchyma, appearing blue in both images (Figure 1).

Bottom Line: Scores were compared against histopathologic results, which were divided into two groups, ie, soft lesions (group 1) and hard lesions (group 2).No statistically significant differences were observed according to patient age or largest lesion diameter.False-negative results on sonoelastography were influenced by histologic type of lesion and not by lesion size or patient age.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Faculdade de Cências Médicas da Santa Casa de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

ABSTRACT

Background: This study assessed factors influencing the sonoelastographic presentation of breast carcinoma.

Methods: A prospective collaborative study was conducted by the Santa Casa de São Paulo and CTC-Center, on 540 breast lesions in women referred for percutaneous breast biopsy. Eighty-four carcinomas showing lesions on ultrasonography were included. These lesions were classified into four sonoelastographic scores, where scores of 1, 2, and 3 were considered false-negative, and a score of 4 was considered true-positive. Scores were compared against histopathologic results, which were divided into two groups, ie, soft lesions (group 1) and hard lesions (group 2). False-negative and true-positive results were also assessed for variation according to patient age and mean lesion diameter.

Results: Of the 84 lesions studied, nine yielded false-negative results on sonoelastography and 75 yielded true-positive results. In terms of histopathologic classification, eight were assigned to group 1 and 76 to group 2. The chi-squared test showed a correlation between sonoelastographic scores and histopathologic lesion type. No statistically significant differences were observed according to patient age or largest lesion diameter.

Conclusion: Our results revealed an association between sonoelastographic presentation of breast lesions and histology. False-negative results on sonoelastography were influenced by histologic type of lesion and not by lesion size or patient age.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus