Whole Breast Ultrasound: Comparison of the Visibility of Suspicious Lesions with Automated Breast Volumetric Scanning Versus Hand-Held Breast Ultrasound.

Journal Article

To assess how well radiologists visualize relevant features of lesions seen with automated breast volumetric scanning (ABVS) in comparison to hand-held breast ultrasound in women going to breast biopsy.Twenty-five subjects were recruited from women who were scheduled to undergo a breast biopsy for at least one Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System four or five lesion identified in a diagnostic setting. In this institutional review board-approved study, the subjects underwent imaging of the breast(s) of concern using a dedicated system that allowed both hand-held breast ultrasound and ABVS. Five experienced breast radiologists reviewed the 30 lesions in 25 subjects in a reader study. Each reader was asked to specify the lesion type, size, imaging features, Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System, and suspicion of malignancy and to compare the lesion characteristics of shape and margins between the two modalities.Seven (23.3%) masses were malignant and 23 (76.4%) were benign. Across all lesions regardless of size or final pathology, there was no significant difference in sensitivity or specificity (P > .15) between the two modalities. For malignant lesions, the reader visualization confidence scores between the two ultrasound modalities were not significantly different (P > .1). However, analysis for nonmalignant cases showed a statistically significant increase in reader visualization confidence in lesion shape and margins (P < .001).Radiologists showed increased confidence in visualization of benign masses and equal confidence in suspicious masses with ABVS imaging. This information could help decrease the need for additional hand-held imaging after automated whole breast ultrasound.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Kuzmiak, CM; Ko, EY; Tuttle, LA; Steed, D; Zeng, D; Yoon, SC

Published Date

  • July 2015

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 22 / 7

Start / End Page

  • 870 - 879

PubMed ID

  • 25872862

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 1878-4046

International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)

  • 1076-6332

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1016/j.acra.2015.03.006

Language

  • eng