|
||||
|
|
Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition) >
2019 , Vol. 16 >Issue 07: 542 - 548
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1672-6448.2019.07.009
Efficacy of conventional ultrasound and S-Detect in differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions
Received date: 2018-09-21
Online published: 2019-07-01
To compare the efficacy of conventional ultrasound and S-Detect in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions.
A total of 468 lesions were identified from 367 patients with breast lesions confirmed by surgery and pathology from June to July in 2018. Both the man-made BI-RADS classifications (still images and dynamic videos identified by three specialist physicians with 1, 4, and 7 years of experience, respectively) and computer S-Detect classification were performed. By plotting the ROC curves of different BI-RADS classification groups, the optimal diagnostic cutoff values were determined. Using pathological results as the gold standard, and the diagnostic test four grids were used to calculate the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of different BI-RADS classifications and S-Detect classification in the diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions, and chi-square tests were used to compare the diagnostic efficacy between groups. The ROC curves of each group were plotted, and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of each BI-RADS classification group was compared with the S-Detect classification group by the Z-test.
Of 468 breast lesions, 313 were confirmed to be benign lesions and 155 confirmed to be malignant lesions by pathological biopsy. The optimal diagnostic cut-off value was determined to be BI-RADS 4a by plotting the ROC curves for different BI-RADS classification diagnostic groups. The sensitivity of S-Detect classification diagnosis was 93.5%, which was significantly higher than those (69.0% and 72.3%) of the 1-year physician by BI-RADS classifications (still images and dynamic videos, respectively, χ2=30.627 and 24.785, respectively, P=0.000 for both). The specificity of S-Detect classification diagnosis was 83.7%, which was significantly lower than that (92.0%) of the 4-year physician by BI-RADS classification (dynamic videos, χ2=10.124, P=0.001). The differences in other diagnostic comparisons were not statistically significant (P>0.05). The AUC of S-Detect classification was 0.917, significantly higher than those (0.790 and 0.803) of the 1-year physician by BI-RADS classifications (still images and dynamic videos, respectively, Z=5.271 and 4.693, respectively, P<0.0001 for both). The difference between the AUC of S-Detect and that of 4-year physician by BI-RADS classification (still images) was not statistically significant (P>0.05). The AUC of S-Detect was lower than that (0.941) of 4-year physician by BI-RADS classification (dynamic videos, Z=4.327, P<0.0001). The AUC of S-Detect classification was lower than those (0.946 and 0.959) of the 7-year physician by BI-RADS classifications (still images and dynamic videos, respectively, Z=4.225 and 5.477, respectively; P<0.0001 for both).
The S-Detect classification can achieve the diagnostic level of the 4-year physician by BI-RADS classification of still images, but is lower than that by dynamic videos.
Key words: S-Detect classification; Breast lesions; Ultrasonography
Huifang Cheng , Xuemei Wang , Xiang Li , Hong Yan , Yixia Zhang , Shu Kang . Efficacy of conventional ultrasound and S-Detect in differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2019 , 16(07) : 542 -548 . DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1672-6448.2019.07.009
1 | 彭卫军, 顾雅佳. 重视乳腺影像学检查技术和诊断水平的普及及提高为降低我国乳腺癌发病率而努力[J]. 中华放射性杂志, 2009, 43(5): 453-454. |
2 | Chang RF, Chang-Chien KC, Takada E, et al. Rapid image stitching and computer-aided detection for multipass automated breast ultrasound [J]. Med Phys, 2010, 37(5): 2063-2073. |
3 | Athanasiou A, Aubert E, Vincent Salomon A, et al. Complex cystic breast masses in ultrasound examination [J]. Diagn Interv Imaging, 2014, 95(2): 169-179. |
4 | Chen DR, Chien CL, Kuo YF. Computer-aided assessment of tumor grade for breast cancer in ultrasound images [J]. Comput Math Methods Med, 2015: 914091. |
5 | 周建桥, 詹维伟. 超声乳腺影像报告数据系统及其解读[J/CD]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2011, 10(3): 1332-1341. |
6 | D′Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, et al. ACR BI-RADS Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System [M]. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2013. |
7 | 周永刚, 袁丽君, 邢长洋, 等. 超声S-Detect分类技术在乳腺包块良恶性诊断中的应用价值[J]. 中华超声影像学杂志, 2017, 26(12): 1053-1056. |
8 | 林韵, 王小燕. 乳腺癌超声征象与分子生物学指标相关性的研究进展[J]. 医学综述, 2014, 20(5): 800-803. |
9 | 肖丽, 周平, 李瑞珍, 等. 麦默通与Tru-cut活检针对乳腺肿块活检的对比分析[J]. 中南大学学报(医学版), 2006, 31(3): 417-479. |
10 | Wang Y, Fan W, Zhao S, et al. Qualitative, quantitative and combination score systems in differential diagnosis of breast lesions by contrast-enhanced ultrasound [J]. Eur J Radiol, 2016, 85(1): 48-54. |
11 | Sellami L, Ben Sassi O, Chtourou K, et al. Breast cancer ultrasound images′ sequence exploration using BI-RADS features′ extraction: towards an advanced clinical aided tool for precise lesion characterization [J]. IEEE Trans Nanobioscience, 2015, 14(7): 740-745. |
12 | 姜海燕, 刘爱玲, 韩东明. S-DetectT M技术在乳腺肿物诊断中的应用分析[J]. 河南医学研究, 2016, 25(6): 979-981. |
13 | 韩红, 俞清, 赵磊, 等. 超声S-Detect技术在甲状腺肿瘤诊断中的初步应用[J]. 中华超声影像学杂志, 2018, 27(1): 28-30. |
14 | 蒋玲, 罗莹, 彭玉兰, 等. 超声图像特征参数分析在乳腺肿瘤鉴别诊断中的应用[J]. 中国组织工程研究与临床康复, 2010, 14(26): 4836-4840. |
15 | 古丽巴合尔, 蒋学祥, 王宵英. 乳腺癌影像诊断研究现状和发展方向[J]. 中国医学影像学杂志, 2010, 18(6): 506-509. |
16 | Kim K, Song MK, Kim EK, et al. Clinical application of S-Detect to breast masses on ultrasonography: a study evaluating the diagnostic performance and agreement with a dedicated breast radiologist [J]. Ultrasonography, 2017, 36(1): 3-9. |
/
〈 |
|
〉 |
Copyright © Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), All Rights Reserved. Tel: 010-51322630、2632、2628 Fax: 010-51322630 E-mail: csbjb@cma.org.cn Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd |