Echogenic Rind Associated With Suspicious Masses on Ultrasound: Performance for Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Associations With Pathologic Tumor Characteristics.

Abstract

Background: The BI-RADS 6th edition ultrasound lexicon is anticipated to include an echogenic rind as a new associated feature, defined as a thick hyperechoic band partially or completely surrounding a mass and disrupting surrounding tissue texture. Objective: To assess the performance for breast malignancy diagnosis and associations with pathologic tumor characteristics of an echogenic rind associated with a suspicious mass on breast ultrasound. Methods: This retrospective study included patients who underwent diagnostic breast ultrasound showing a suspicious mass (BI-RADS category 4 or 5) and subsequent ultrasound-guided biopsy from July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023. Two radiologists independently reviewed ultrasound examinations for echogenic rinds (requiring ≥25% circumferential extent) associated with masses; readers also measured masses without and with inclusion of echogenic rinds. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using histopathology as the reference. Results: The study included 511 patients (mean age, 52 years) with 583 suspicious masses; 249 masses were diagnosed as breast malignancy. Presence of echogenic rind yielded sensitivity and specificity for breast malignancy for reader 1 of 58% and 81%, and reader 2 of 51% and 85%, respectively. An echogenic rind was associated with invasive cancer for reader 1 (invasive ductal carcinoma [IDC] [62%], invasive lobular carcinoma [ILC] [57%], ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS] [24%]; p=.003) and reader 2 (IDC [53%], ILC [53%], DCIS [18%]; p=.03). An echogenic rind was associated with invasive cancer molecular subtype for reader 1 (luminal A [66%], luminal B [48%], HER2-enriched [100%], basal-like [49%], p=.002) and reader 2 (luminal A [62%], luminal B [32%], HER2-enriched [67%], basal-like [31%]; p<.001). In 168 resected malignancies, the difference between pathologic tumor size (mean, 19 mm) and ultrasound-based mass size, without and with inclusion of echogenic rinds, for reader 1 was 4 mm and 3 mm, and reader 2 was 7 mm and 5 mm, respectively. Conclusions: An echogenic rind serves as a more specific than sensitive indicator of breast malignancy. Among breast malignancies, the finding is associated with invasive cancer. Inclusion of the rind decreases tumor size underestimation relative to surgical pathology. Clinical Impact: These results provide insights into the clinical implications of an echogenic rind on ultrasound.