Lesion conspicuity and contrast kinetics as predictors to differentiate benign and malignant breast lesions in contrast-enhanced mammogram

IF 0.7 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Porkodi Dharmalingam, Devimeenal Jagannathan
{"title":"Lesion conspicuity and contrast kinetics as predictors to differentiate benign and malignant breast lesions in contrast-enhanced mammogram","authors":"Porkodi Dharmalingam, Devimeenal Jagannathan","doi":"10.1186/s43055-024-01349-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) is a recently developed, cost-effective imaging technique that offers both anatomical and functional breast imaging. Lesion conspicuity, a newly introduced lexicon in the ACR BIRADS supplementary atlas on CEM (2022), lacks sufficient data to correlate with malignancy likelihood. The feasibility of assessing contrast kinetics with CEM remains uncertain, and there is a scarcity of available data. Our research aims to address these gaps. Two radiologists, blinded to pathological reports, independently evaluated 504 CEM enhanced breast lesions with histopathology reports, out of which 176 were benign and 328 were malignant. Subjective qualitative assessment of lesion conspicuity and contrast kinetics was done for each enhancing lesion. The lesion conspicuity was classified as low, moderate, or high. The kinetic behavior of each lesion was categorized into either persistent, plateau, or washout. The distribution of lesion conspicuity among benign and malignant lesions, respectively, was as follows: for low conspicuity, 74.4% versus 25.6%; for moderate conspicuity, 30.6% versus 69.4%; and for high conspicuity, 8.4% versus 91.6%. Regarding contrast kinetics and their distribution between benign and malignant lesions, persistent kinetics was detected in 95.6% compared to 4.4%, plateau kinetics in 43.4% versus 56.6%, and washout kinetics in 3.5% versus 96.5%. Statistically significant differences in distribution between benign and malignant lesions were observed for both lexicons (P < 0.001). The inter-observer agreement for lesion conspicuity (kappa = 0.97) and contrast kinetics (kappa = 0.92) was deemed excellent. The addition of lesion conspicuity and contrast kinetics as lexicons in CEM could enhance its diagnostic accuracy.","PeriodicalId":11540,"journal":{"name":"Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43055-024-01349-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) is a recently developed, cost-effective imaging technique that offers both anatomical and functional breast imaging. Lesion conspicuity, a newly introduced lexicon in the ACR BIRADS supplementary atlas on CEM (2022), lacks sufficient data to correlate with malignancy likelihood. The feasibility of assessing contrast kinetics with CEM remains uncertain, and there is a scarcity of available data. Our research aims to address these gaps. Two radiologists, blinded to pathological reports, independently evaluated 504 CEM enhanced breast lesions with histopathology reports, out of which 176 were benign and 328 were malignant. Subjective qualitative assessment of lesion conspicuity and contrast kinetics was done for each enhancing lesion. The lesion conspicuity was classified as low, moderate, or high. The kinetic behavior of each lesion was categorized into either persistent, plateau, or washout. The distribution of lesion conspicuity among benign and malignant lesions, respectively, was as follows: for low conspicuity, 74.4% versus 25.6%; for moderate conspicuity, 30.6% versus 69.4%; and for high conspicuity, 8.4% versus 91.6%. Regarding contrast kinetics and their distribution between benign and malignant lesions, persistent kinetics was detected in 95.6% compared to 4.4%, plateau kinetics in 43.4% versus 56.6%, and washout kinetics in 3.5% versus 96.5%. Statistically significant differences in distribution between benign and malignant lesions were observed for both lexicons (P < 0.001). The inter-observer agreement for lesion conspicuity (kappa = 0.97) and contrast kinetics (kappa = 0.92) was deemed excellent. The addition of lesion conspicuity and contrast kinetics as lexicons in CEM could enhance its diagnostic accuracy.
在对比增强乳腺 X 光检查中,病变的明显性和对比度动力学是区分乳腺良性和恶性病变的预测因素
对比增强乳腺 X 射线摄影(CEM)是最近开发的一种经济有效的成像技术,可同时进行乳腺解剖和功能成像。病变显着性是 ACR BIRADS 关于 CEM 的补充图集(2022 年)中新引入的词汇,但缺乏足够的数据将其与恶性肿瘤的可能性联系起来。用 CEM 评估造影剂动力学的可行性仍不确定,可用数据也很稀缺。我们的研究旨在填补这些空白。两名放射科医生在病理报告盲区内,独立评估了 504 例 CEM 增强乳腺病变和组织病理学报告,其中 176 例为良性,328 例为恶性。他们对每个增强病灶的病变清晰度和造影剂动力学进行了主观定性评估。病灶的清晰度分为低、中、高三个等级。每个病灶的动力学表现分为持续、高原或消失。良性病变和恶性病变的病灶清晰度分布分别为:低清晰度,74.4% 对 25.6%;中度清晰度,30.6% 对 69.4%;高清晰度,8.4% 对 91.6%。关于造影剂动力学及其在良性病变和恶性病变之间的分布,95.6%的造影剂动力学检测到持续动力学,而 4.4%的造影剂动力学检测不到持续动力学;43.4%的造影剂动力学检测到高原动力学,而 56.6%的造影剂动力学检测不到高原动力学;3.5%的造影剂动力学检测到冲出动力学,而 96.5%的造影剂动力学检测不到冲出动力学。两种词典在良性病变和恶性病变之间的分布差异具有统计学意义(P < 0.001)。病灶清晰度(kappa = 0.97)和对比度动力学(kappa = 0.92)的观察者间一致性被认为非常好。在 CEM 中增加病灶明显性和对比度动力学词典可提高其诊断准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine
Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
233
审稿时长
27 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信