Extensibility of the supraspinatus muscle can be predicted by combining shear wave elastography and magnetic resonance imaging-measured quantitative metrics of stiffness and volumetric fat infiltration: A cadaveric study

Abstract Background Breast cancer is one of the leading causes of female morbidity and mortality. Management options vary between lesions of BIRADS categories 3 and 4. Therefore, reliable differentiation would improve outcome. Although sonomammography and contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) remain the cornerstone for assessment of breast disease, additional, non-invasive techniques can be used to increase the efficiency of evaluation such as shear wave elastography (SWE) and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI). This prospective study included 66 breast lesions that were categorized as BIRADS 3 or 4 by ultrasound ± mammography. All lesions were evaluated by SWE, CE-MRI and DW-MRI. For SWE, lesions were evaluated by both qualitative and quantitative methods. For CE-MRI, both morphological and kinematic evaluations were done and for DW-MRI, both qualitative and quantitative assessments were studied. Results of all imaging modalities were correlated to histopathology. Results Thirty-seven out of the examined 66 lesions (56.06%) were categorised as BIRADS 3, out of which 1 (2.7%) turned out to be malignant on histopathology and 36 (97.29%) were proved benign. Twenty-nine (43.93%) were categorized as BIRADS 4, out of which 2 (6.89%) turned out to be benign on pathology and 27 (93.1%) were proved malignant. Morphological and kinematic evaluations of CE-MRI showed 92.59% and 92.86%sensitivity, 94.74% and 84.21% specificity, 92.59 and 81.25%PPV, 94.74 and 94.12% NPV, and 93.85% and 87.88% accuracy respectively. Color-coded scoring of SWE showed indices of 89.29%, 68.42%, 67.57%, 89.66%, and 77.27% respectively. The calculated cut-off value for Emax differentiating benign from malignant was 65.15 kpa, resulting in indices of 96.43%, 57.89%, 95.65%, 62.79%, and 74.24% respectively. For Eratio, the calculated cut-off value was 4.55, resulting in indices of 71.43%, 68.42%, 76.47%, 62.50% and 69.70% respectively. For qualitative evaluation of DW-MRI, indices were 78.57%, 65.79%, 62.86%, 80.65%, and 71.21% respectively. For ADC, the calculated cut-off value was 1.25 × 103 mm2/s, which resulted in indices of 75.00%, 84.21%, 82.05%, 77.78%, and 80.30% respectively. Conclusion CE-MRI showed the best diagnostic performance indices. While, SWE and DW-MRI present variable diagnostic performance, both techniques can be used as an adjunct to other imaging modalities to aid the clinical decision and increase its diagnostic confidence.

Download Full-text

Differentiating solid breast masses: comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of shear wave elastography and magnetic resonance imaging

Diagnosis ◽

10.1515/dx-2020-0056 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 0 (0) ◽

Author(s):

Maryam Farghadani ◽

Rozbeh Barikbin ◽

Mostafa Haji Rezaei ◽

Ali Hekmatnia ◽

Marzieh Aalinezhad ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽

Magnetic Resonance ◽

Shear Wave ◽

Breast Imaging ◽

Shear Wave Elastography ◽

Diagnostic Value ◽

Resonance Imaging ◽

Diagnostic Agreement ◽

Gold Standard Method ◽

Breast Masses

AbstractObjectivesShear wave elastography (SWE) quantitatively determines the nature of the breast lesions. Few previous studies have compared the diagnostic value of this modality with other imaging techniques. The present study aimed to compare the diagnostic value of SWE with that of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detecting the nature of the breast masses.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, 80 patients with breast lumps who had Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) score of three or higher based on mammography and/or screening ultrasonography, underwent 3D SWE and MRI. The lesions were classified according to MRI BI-RADS scoring; Mean elasticity (Emean) and elasticity ratio (Eratio) for each lesion were also determined by SWE. The results of these two modalities were compared with histopathologic diagnosis as the gold standard method; diagnostic value and diagnostic agreement were then calculated.ResultsOf the masses, 46.2% were histopathologically proven to be malignant. The Emean for benign and malignant masses was 34.04 ± 19.51 kPa and 161.92 ± 58.14 kPa, respectively. Both modalities had diagnostic agreement with histopathologic results (p<0.001). Kappa coefficient was 0.87 for SWE and 0.42 for MRI. The sensitivity of both methods was 94.59% (95% CI: 81.81–99.34), while the specificity and accuracy were 48.84% [95% CI: 33.31–64.54] and 70.0% [95% CI: 58.72–79.74] for MRI, and 93.02% [95% CI: 80.94–98.54] and 93.75% [95% CI: 86.01–97.94] for SWE.ConclusionsSWE has better diagnostic value in terms of determining the nature of the breast masses. SWE can increase the diagnostic function of differentiating benign masses from malignant ones.

Download Full-text