Journal of Surgery Concepts & Practice >
A comparative study on breast cancer between smaller and larger diameters using conventional ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound
Received date: 2021-08-16
Online published: 2022-08-03
Objective To investigate the features of breast cancer with different sizes of tumor examined using conventional ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Methods A total of 107 cases with breast cancer diagnosed by pathology were retrospectively analyzed. There were one group(group≤2.0 cm) with tumor maximum diameter ≤2.0 cm (50.5%, 54 cases) and other group (group >2.0 cm) with that >2.0 cm (49.5%, 53 cases) based on diameter of breast cancer. The features shown with both conventional ultrasound and CEUS examination were compared between two groups. Results Non-parallel orientation was more present in group ≤2.0 cm than in group >2.0 cm by conventional ultrasound [19 cases(35.2%) vs. 6 cases(11.3%), P=0.004]. More cases with Alder grade of blood flow 0-Ⅰ were found in group ≤2.0 cm than those in group >2.0 cm [41 (75.9%) cases vs. 25 (47.2%) cases, P=0.002]. There were four characteristics with differences between two groups in CEUS examination. First was there were 23(42.6%) cases of breast cancer with hypo-enhancement and iso-enhancement in ≤2.0 cm group and 5 (9.4%) cases in group >2.0 cm with statistically significant differences, P<0.001. Second, more cases without perforating vessels around tumor were in group ≤2.0 cm than those in group >2.0 cm [34 (63.0%) cases vs. 20 (37.7%) cases, P=0.009]. Third, the cases with filling defect of contrast in tumor were more in group ≤2.0 cm than in group >2.0 cm [49(90.7%) cases vs. 30(56.6%) cases, P<0.001]. Last was more cases with clearance time early (not late) of contrast after the enhancement in group ≤2.0 cm were than in group >2.0 cm [48(88.9%) cases vs. 37(69.8%) cases, P=0.038]. The differences between two groups were significant statistically. Conclusions The results in this study showed that the difference in the characteristics of conventional ultrasound and CEUS imaging is clear in different size of breast cancer. The size of focus should be considered in the analysis of CEUS.
LIU Miao, SHEN Yan, FU Xiaohong, HU Jiaojiao, CHEN Qingqing, YING Tao . A comparative study on breast cancer between smaller and larger diameters using conventional ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound[J]. Journal of Surgery Concepts & Practice, 2022 , 27(03) : 229 -233 . DOI: 10.16139/j.1007-9610.2022.03.009
| [1] | Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2020[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2020, 70(1):7-30. |
| [2] | DeSantis CE, Ma J, Goding Sauer A, et al. Breast cancer statistics,2017, racial disparity in mortality by state[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2017, 67(6):439-448. |
| [3] | 余小琴, 姚兰辉, 于岚. 小乳腺癌超声直接及间接征象的诊断价值[J]. 中华超声影像学杂志, 2008, 17(10):879-882. |
| [4] | 汤兵辉, 肖秋金, 程淑珍. 二维超声联合弹性成像及三维超声对T1期乳腺癌的诊断价值[J]. 中国超声医学杂志, 2016, 32(11):973-976. |
| [5] | Luo J, Chen JD, Chen Q, et al. Predictive model for contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the breast: is it feasible in malignant risk assessment of breast imaging reporting and data system 4 lesions?[J]. World J Radiol, 2016, 8(6):600-609. |
| [6] | Janu E, Krikavova L, Little J, et al. Prospective evaluation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound of breast BI-RADS 3-5 lesions[J]. BMC Med Imaging, 2020, 20(1):66. |
| [7] | 沈若霞, 杨丽春, 罗晓茂, 等. 基于中国多中心研究数据的乳腺良恶性病灶超声造影定性特征的回顾性研究[J]. 中国医学影像学杂志, 2018, 26(12):885-889. |
| [8] | Xiao X, Jiang Q, Wu H, et al. Diagnosis of sub-centimetre breast lesions: combining BI-RADS-US with strain elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound-a preliminary study in China[J]. Eur Radiol, 2017, 27(6):2443-2450. |
| [9] | Spak DA, Plaxco JS, Santiago L, et al. BI-RADS® fifth edition: a summary of changes[J]. Diagn Interv Imaging, 2017, 98(3):179-190. |
| [10] | Adler DD, Carson PL, Rubin JM, et al. Doppler ultrasound color flow imaging in the study of breast cancer: preliminary findings[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 1990, 16(6):553-559. |
| [11] | Gradishar WJ, Anderson BO, Abraham J, et al. Breast Cancer, Version 3.2020, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology[J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2020, 18(4):452-478. |
| [12] | 沈松杰, 孙强. 中国女性乳腺癌筛查现状及适宜模式探索[J]. 协和医学杂志, 2018, 9(4):298-302. |
| [13] | Leng X, Huang G, Ma F, et al. Regional contrast-enhanced ultrasonography(CEUS) characteristics of breast cancer and correlation with microvessel density(MVD)[J]. Med Sci Monit, 2017, 23:3428-3436. |
| [14] | 李静, 郭丽苹. 超声造影在乳腺癌中的临床应用进展[J]. 医学综述, 2018, 24(9):1817-1821. |
| [15] | 轩维锋, 徐晓红, 张建兴, 等. 乳腺超声与病理诊断[M]. 北京: 科学技术文献出版社, 2019:9-11. |
| [16] | 冷晓玲, 黄国福, 马富成. 乳腺癌病灶大小与超声造影表现的相关性[J]. 中华超声影像学杂志, 2015, 24(4):324-327. |
| [17] | Golbabapour S, Pang WW, George J, et al. Chemically induced breast tumors in rats are detectable in early stages by contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging but not by changes in the acute-phase reactants in serum[J]. Int J Mol Sci, 2011, 12(2):1030-1040. |
| [18] | Cichon MA, Degnim AC, Visscher DW, et al. Microenvironmental influences that drive progression from benign breast disease to invasive breast cancer[J]. J Mammary Gland Boil Neoplasia, 2010, 15(4):389-397. |
| [19] | Suzuki N, Shiota T, Watanabe F, et al. Discovery of novel 5-alkynyl-4-anilinopyrimidines as potent, orally active dual inhibitors of EGFR and Her-2 tyrosine kinases[J]. Bioorg Med Chem Lett, 2012, 22(1):456-460. |
| [20] | 高军喜, 王雅婷, 杨磊, 等. 乳腺癌超声造影特征及边缘带定量参数与生物学预后因子相关性研究[J]. 中国超声医学杂志, 2019, 35(4):306-309. |
| [21] | 赵璐, 张莹, 程颢, 等. 乳腺超声造影预测模型的建立及其对乳腺良恶性病变诊断效能的分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2019, 16(6):419-425. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
