{"title":"Dynamic anatomical ultrasound assessment for breast lesions: a prospective study of diagnostic performance.","authors":"Ayumi Izumori, Yumi Kokubu, Takehiko Sakai, Futoshi Akiyama, Takuji Iwase, Woo Kyung Moon, Takayuki Ueno","doi":"10.1007/s10396-026-01657-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine whether a dynamic ultrasound approach, termed anatomical scanning and interpretation, improves diagnostic performance in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions compared with conventional static-image BI-RADS assessment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective study evaluated 102 breast lesions (33 masses, 41 non-masses, and 28 distortions) classified as BI-RADS 3, 4a, or 4b. Fourteen ultrasound technologists underwent dedicated training in dynamic anatomical scanning and interpretation. Each lesion was evaluated using real-time video clips and independently categorized as requiring follow-up or biopsy. A subsequent physician-technologist consensus was performed. With histopathology as the reference standard, performance was assessed using ROC analysis, with AUC comparisons performed using the DeLong test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 102 lesions (58 benign, 44 malignant), individual technologist interpretation with dynamic imaging significantly improved diagnostic performance (AUC = 0.748, p = 0.0191) over static BI-RADS assessment (AUC = 0.619). Physician-technologist consensus showed further significant improvement (AUC = 0.865, p < 0.0001). In subgroup analysis, dynamic interpretation outperformed static assessment for masses (AUC = 0.849, p = 0.0036), but not for non-mass lesions (AUC = 0.794) or distortions (AUC = 0.618). In contrast, physician-technologist consensus interpretation demonstrated superior performance compared with static assessment across all lesion types: masses (AUC = 0.879, p < 0.0001), non-mass lesions (AUC = 0.910, p = 0.0005), and distortions (AUC = 0.838, p = 0.0432).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Dynamic anatomical scanning and interpretation significantly improve diagnostic performance over conventional static BI-RADS assessment. For non-mass lesions and architectural distortions, anatomical interpretation based on consensus between the physician and the technologist is considered essential to achieve optimal diagnostic accuracy.</p>","PeriodicalId":50130,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Ultrasonics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Ultrasonics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10396-026-01657-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To determine whether a dynamic ultrasound approach, termed anatomical scanning and interpretation, improves diagnostic performance in differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions compared with conventional static-image BI-RADS assessment.
Methods: This prospective study evaluated 102 breast lesions (33 masses, 41 non-masses, and 28 distortions) classified as BI-RADS 3, 4a, or 4b. Fourteen ultrasound technologists underwent dedicated training in dynamic anatomical scanning and interpretation. Each lesion was evaluated using real-time video clips and independently categorized as requiring follow-up or biopsy. A subsequent physician-technologist consensus was performed. With histopathology as the reference standard, performance was assessed using ROC analysis, with AUC comparisons performed using the DeLong test.
Results: Among 102 lesions (58 benign, 44 malignant), individual technologist interpretation with dynamic imaging significantly improved diagnostic performance (AUC = 0.748, p = 0.0191) over static BI-RADS assessment (AUC = 0.619). Physician-technologist consensus showed further significant improvement (AUC = 0.865, p < 0.0001). In subgroup analysis, dynamic interpretation outperformed static assessment for masses (AUC = 0.849, p = 0.0036), but not for non-mass lesions (AUC = 0.794) or distortions (AUC = 0.618). In contrast, physician-technologist consensus interpretation demonstrated superior performance compared with static assessment across all lesion types: masses (AUC = 0.879, p < 0.0001), non-mass lesions (AUC = 0.910, p = 0.0005), and distortions (AUC = 0.838, p = 0.0432).
Conclusion: Dynamic anatomical scanning and interpretation significantly improve diagnostic performance over conventional static BI-RADS assessment. For non-mass lesions and architectural distortions, anatomical interpretation based on consensus between the physician and the technologist is considered essential to achieve optimal diagnostic accuracy.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Medical Ultrasonics is the official journal of the Japan Society of Ultrasonics in Medicine. The main purpose of the journal is to provide forum for the publication of papers documenting recent advances and new developments in the entire field of ultrasound in medicine and biology, encompassing both the medical and the engineering aspects of the science.The journal welcomes original articles, review articles, images, and letters to the editor.The journal also provides state-of-the-art information such as announcements from the boards and the committees of the society.