Can Doppler or contrast-enhanced ultrasound analysis add diagnostically important information about the nature of breast lesions?
Carregando...
Citações na Scopus
28
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2014
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
HOSPITAL CLINICAS, UNIV SAO PAULO
Autores
Citação
CLINICS, v.69, n.2, p.87-92, 2014
Resumo
OBJECTIVES: Despite evidence suggesting that Doppler ultrasonography can help to differentiate between benign and malignant breast lesions, it is rarely applied in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to determine whether certain vascular features of breast masses observed by duplex Doppler and color Doppler ultrasonography (before and/or after microbubble contrast injection) add information to the gray-scale analysis and support the Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) classification. METHODS: Seventy solid lesions were prospectively evaluated with gray-scale ultrasonography, color Doppler ultrasonography, and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. The morphological analysis and lesion vascularity were correlated with the histological results. RESULTS: Percutaneous core biopsies revealed that 25/70 (17.5%) lesions were malignant, while 45 were benign. Hypervascular lesions with tortuous and central vessels, a resistive index (RI)> 0.73 before contrast injection, and an RI > 0.75 after contrast injection were significantly predictive of malignancy (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The combination of gray-scale ultrasonography data with unenhanced or enhanced duplex Doppler and color Doppler US data can provide diagnostically useful information. These techniques can be easily implemented because Doppler devices are already present in most health centers.
Palavras-chave
Breast Ultrasonography, Ultrasonography, Doppler, Duplex, Breast Cancer, Contrast Media, Microbubbles
Referências
- American College of Radiology, 2003, IL BREAST IM REP DAT
- Berg WA, 2008, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V299, P2151, DOI 10.1001/jama.299.18.2151
- Buadu LD, 1997, CLIN RADIOL, V52, P917, DOI 10.1016/S0009-9260(97)80224-3
- Cao XL, 2012, ULTRASOUND MED BIOL, V38, P2065, DOI 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2012.07.027
- Caproni N, 2010, EUR RADIOL, V20, P1384, DOI 10.1007/s00330-009-1690-1
- Chala L, 2007, J CLIN ULTRASOUND, V35, P9, DOI 10.1002/jcu.20298
- Choi HY, 1999, CLIN IMAG, V23, P284, DOI 10.1016/S0899-7071(99)00152-7
- Crystal P, 2005, J CLIN ULTRASOUND, V33, P47, DOI 10.1002/jcu.20089
- del Cura JL, 2005, AM J ROENTGENOL, V184, P1788
- Du J, 2012, EUR J RADIOL, V81, P3890, DOI 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.09.004
- Giuseppetti GM, 1998, EUR J RADIOL, V27, pS254, DOI 10.1016/S0720-048X(98)00076-X
- Gokalp G, 2009, EUR J RADIOL, V70, P77, DOI 10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.12.007
- Hollerweger A, 1997, ULTRASOUND MED BIOL, V23, P851, DOI 10.1016/S0301-5629(97)00029-X
- Huber S, 1998, RADIOLOGY, V208, P485
- Kedar RP, 1996, RADIOLOGY, V198, P679
- Leconte I, 2003, AM J ROENTGENOL, V180, P1675
- LESS JR, 1991, CANCER RES, V51, P265
- Moon WK, 2000, RADIOLOGY, V217, P240
- Porter T R, 1995, J Am Soc Echocardiogr, V8, P710, DOI 10.1016/S0894-7317(05)80386-4
- Raza S, 1997, RADIOLOGY, V203, P164
- Schroeder RJ, 2003, EUR RADIOL, V13, P68, DOI 10.1007/s00330-002-1413-3
- Wan C, 2012, EUR J RADIOL, V81, P444
- Wan CF, 2012, RADIOLOGY, V262, P450, DOI 10.1148/radiol.11110789
- Wilson SR, 2009, AM J ROENTGENOL, V193, P55, DOI 10.2214/AJR.09.2553