Clinical implications of breast ultrasound elastography

Authors

  • Łukasz Kwietniewski Department of Radiology, Medical University of Lublin Author
  • Angelika Kuczyńska Department of Radiology, Medical University of Lublin Author
  • Wiktor Kupisz Department of Radiology, Medical University of Lublin Author
  • Magdalena Kwietniewska Department of Surgical Oncology, Medical University of Lublin Author
  • Witold Krupski Department of Radiology, Medical University of Lublin Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2478/pjph-2020-0004

Keywords:

elasticity imaging techniques, breast neoplasm, Tsukuba University Score

Abstract

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in Polish women and the second leading cause of cancer deaths. Screening mammography is the only recognized method for early detection of malignant neoplasm and provides to reduction in cancer related deaths so far. The sensitivity of this examination is strongly influenced by the structure of the breast and is definitely lower for breasts of type 2 and 3 in accordance to American College of Radiology. That is why it is suggested that women younger than 35 years should be examined with ultrasound if necessary, and for women 35 years and older it is recommended to perform mammography, as the primary breast study. Ultrasound elastography is noninvasive imaging technique which can contribute to increase the sensitivity and specificity of recognition breast lesions. There are two main types of elastography: static and shear wave one. According to tissue stiffness, static elastography encodes lesions using a 5-point color scale – the Tsukuba University Score.
Improvements in the interpretation of non-invasive examinations with using ultrasound elastography were discussed. It is considered that addition ultrasound elastography to ultrasound B-mode can play an important role in verification focal lesions in the breast

References

1. Didkowska J, Wojciechowska U. Nowotwory złośliwe w Polsce w 2013 roku. Warszawa: Centrum Onkologii – Instytut im. M. Skłodowskiej-Curie; 2015.

2. Oeffinger KC, Fontham ET, Etzioni R, et al. Breast cancer screening for women at average risk: 2015 Guideline Update From the American Cancer Society. JAMA. 2015;314(15):1599-614.

3. D’Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, Morris EA. ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA. American College of Radiology; 2018.

4. Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yank Askas BC, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement the rapyuse on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:168-75.

5. Costantini M, Belli P, Lombardi R, et al. Characterization of solid Breast Masses. J Ultrasound Med. 2006;25:649-61.

6. Gennisson JL, Deffieux T, Fink M, Tanter M. Ultrasound elastography: principles and techniques. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2013;94:487-95.

7. Sigrist RMS, Liau J, Kaffas AE, et al. Ultrasound elastography: Review of techniques and clinical applications. Theranostics. 2017;7(5):1303-29.

8. Faruk T, Islam MK, Arefin S, Haq MZ. The Journey of Elastography: Background, Current Status, and Future Possibilities in Breast Cancer Diagnosis. Clin Breast Cancer. 2015;15(5):313-24.

9. Barr RG. Sonographic breast elastography: a primer. J Ultrasound Med. 2012;31:773-83.

10. Nowicki A, Dobruch-Sobczak K. Introduction to ultrasound elastography. J Ultrason. 2016;16(65):113-24.

11. Itoh A, Ueno E, Tohno E, et al. Breastdisease: clinicalapplication of US elastography for diagnosis. Radiology. 2006;239:341-50.

12. Cho N, Jang M, Lyou CY, et al. Distinguishing benign from malignant masses at breast US: combined US elastography and color Doppler US-influence on radiologist accuracy. Radiology. 2012;262:80-90.

13. Ophir J, Céspedes I, Ponnekanti H, et al. Elastography: aquantitative method for imaging the elasticity in biologicaltissues. Ultrason Imaging. 1991;13:111-34.

14. Mohey N, Hassan TA. Value of mammography and combined grey scale ultrasound and ultrasound elastography in the differentiation of solid breast lesions. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med. 2014;45:253-61.

15. Fischer T, Peisker U, Fiedor S, et al. Significant differentiation of focal breast lesions: raw data-based calculation of strain ratio. Ultraschall in der Medizin. 2012;33:372-9.

16. Dobruch-Sobczak K. The differentiation of the character of solid lesions in the breast in the compression sonoelastography. Part II: Diagnostic value of BIRADS-US classification, Tsukuba score and FLR ratio. J Ultrason. 2013;13(52):31-49.

17. Katyan A, Mittal MK, Mani C, Mandal AK. Strain wave elastography in response assessment to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced breast cancer. Br J Radiol. 2019;92(1099):20180515.

18. Choi HY, Seo M, Sohn YM, et al. Shear wave elastography for the diagnosis of small (≤2 cm) breast lesions: added value and factors associated with false results. Br J Radiol. 2019;92(1097):20180341.

Downloads

Published

2021-01-13