Real-time elastography for the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions: A meta-analysis

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Volumn 130, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 11-18

  Gong, Xia ^a   Xu, Qiuhua ^a   Xu, Zhengliang ^a   Xiong, Ping ^a   Yan, Weili ^b   Chen, Yazhu ^c  

^a SHANGHAI JIAO TONG UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (China)

^b Pudong Institute for Health Development   (China)

^c SHANGHAI JIAO TONG UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Breast lesions; Meta analysis; RTE; Sensitivity; Specificity

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BENIGN TUMOR; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST TUMOR; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; ELASTICITY SCORE; ELASTOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; META ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REAL TIME ELASTOGRAPHY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STRAIN RATIO; TUMOR DIFFERENTIATION;

BREAST DISEASES; BREAST NEOPLASMS; ELASTICITY IMAGING TECHNIQUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PUBLICATION BIAS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 82455164144     PISSN: 01676806     EISSN: 15737217     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10549-011-1745-2     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Rahbar G, Sie AC, Hansen GC, Prince JS, Melany ML, Reynolds HE et al (1999) Benign versus malignant solid breast masses: US differentiation. Radiology 213(3):889-894
2. Stavros AT, Thickman D, Rapp CL, Dennis MA, Parker SH, Sisney GA (1995) Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology 196:123-134
3. Jackson VP (1995) The current role of ultrasonography in breast imaging. Radiol Clin North Am 33(6):1161-1170
4. Duncan JL III, Cederbom GJ, Champaign JL, Smetherman DH, King TA, Farr GH et al (2000) Benign diagnosis by image-guided core-needle breast biopsy. Am Surg 66(1):5-10 (Pubitemid 30041775)
5. Chiou SY, Chou YH, Chiou H J M, Wang HK, Tiu CM, Tseng LM et al (2006) Sonographic features of nonpalpable breast cancer: a study based on ultrasound-guided wire-localized surgical biopsies. Ultrasound Med Biol 32(9):1299-1306
6. Berlin JA (1997) Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? University of Pennsylvania Meta-analysis Blinding Study Group. Lancet 350(9072):185-186 (Pubitemid 27303630)
7. Dinnes J, Deeks J, Kirby J, Roderick P (2005) A methodological review of how heterogeneity has been examined in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Health Technol Assess 9(12):1-113
8. Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B (1993) Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data analytic approaches and some additional considerations. Stat Med 12(14):1293-1316 (Pubitemid 23230833)
9. Altman DG, Bland JM (2003) Interaction revisited: the difference between two estimates. BMJ 326(7382):219 (Pubitemid 36143396)
10. Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, Khan K, Coomarasamy A (2006) Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol 6:31
11. Moon WK, Huang CS, Shen WC, Takada E, Chang RF, Joe J et al (2009) Analysis of elastographic and B-mode features at sonoelastography for breast tumor classification. Ultrasound Med Biol 35(11):1794-1802
12. Leong LC, Sim LS, Lee YS, Ng FC, Wan CM, Fook-Chong SM et al (2010) A prospective study to compare the diagnostic performance of breast elastography versus conventional breast ultrasound. Clin Radiol 65(11):887-894
13. Barr RG (2010) Real-time ultrasound elasticity of the breast: initial clinical results. Ultrasound Q 26(2):61-66
14. Itoh A, Ueno E, Tohno E, Kamma H, Takahashi H, Shiina T et al (2006) Breast disease: clinical application of US elastography for diagnosis. Radiology 239(2):341-350
15. Thomas A, Kummel S, Fritzche F, Warm M, Ebert B, Hammet B et al (2006) Real-time sonoelastography performed in addition to B-mode ultrasound and mammography: improved differentiation of breast lesions? Acad Radiol 13(12):1496-1504 (Pubitemid 44809997)
16. Thomas A, Fischer T, Frey H, Ohlinger R, Grunwald S, Blohmer JU et al (2006) Real-time elastography: an advanced method of ultrasound-first results in 108 patients with breast lesions. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 28(3):335-340 (Pubitemid 44409062)
17. Zhi H, Ou B, Luo BM, Feng X, Wen YL, Yang HY (2007) Comparison of ultrasound elastography, mammography, and sonography in the diagnosis of solid breast lesions. J Ultrasound Med 26(6):807-815 (Pubitemid 46870348)
18. Cho N, Moon WK, Park JS, Cha JH, Jang M, Seong MH (2008) Nonpalpable breast masses: evaluation by US elastography. Korean J Radiol 9(2):111-118
19. Tan SM, Teh HS, Mancer JF, Poh WT (2008) Improving B mode ultrasound of breast lesions with real-time ultrasound elastography: a clinical approach. Breast 17:252-257 (Pubitemid 351729151)
20. Zhu QL, Jiang YX, Liu JB, Liu H, Sun Q, Dai Q et al (2008) Real-time ultrasound elastography: its potential role in assessment of breast lesions. Ultrasound Med Biol 34(8):1232-1238 (Pubitemid 352010459)
21. Scaperrotta G, Ferranti C, Costa C, Mariani L, Marchesini M, Suman L et al (2008) Role of sonoelastography in non-palpable breast lesions. Eur Radiol 18(11):2381-2389
22. Sohn YM, Kim MJ, Kim EK et al (2009) Sonographic elastography combined with conventional sonography: how much is it helpful for diagnostic performance? J Ultrasound Med 28:413-420
23. Fleury Ede F, Fleury JC, Piato S, Roveda D (2009) New elastographic classification of breast lesions during and after compression. Diagn Interv Radiol 15(2):96-103
24. Cho N, Moon WK, Park JS (2009) Real-time US elastography in the differentiation of suspicious microcalcifications on mammography. Eur Radiol 19(7):1621-1628
25. Schaefer FK, Heer I, Schaefer PJ et al (2011) Breast ultrasound elastography-results of 193 breast lesions in a prospective study with histopathologic correlation. Eur J Radiol 77:450-456
26. Cho N, Moon WK, Kim HY, Chang MJ, Park SH, Lyou CY (2010) Sonoelastographic strain index for differentiation of benign and malignant nonpalpable breast masses. J Ultrasound Med 29:1-7
27. Chung SY, Moon WK, Choi JW, Cho N, Jang MJ, Kim KG (2010) Differentiation of benign from malignant nonpalpable breast masses: a comparison of computer-assisted quantification and visual assessment of lesion stiffness with the use of sonographic elastography. Acta Radiol 51(1):9-14
28. Raza S, Odulate A, Ong EM, Chikarmane S, Harston CW (2010) Using real-time tissue elastography for breast lesion evaluation: our initial experience. J Ultrasound Med 29:551-563
29. Thomas A, Degenhardt F, Farrokh A, Wojcinski S, Slowinski T, Fischer T et al (2010) Significant differentiation of focal breast lesions: calculation of strain ratio in breast sonoelastography. Acad Radiol 17(5):558-563
30. Regini E, Bagnera S, Tota D, Campanino P, Luparia A, Barisone F et al (2010) Role of sonoelastography in characterising breast nodules Preliminary experience with 120 lesions. Radiol Med 115(4):551-562
31. Zhi H, Xiao XY, Yang HY, Ou B, Wen YL, Luo BM (2010) Ultrasonic elastography in breast cancer diagnosis: strain ratio vs. 5-point scale. Acad Radiol 17(10):1227-1233
32. Parajuly SS, Lan PY, Yan L, Gang YZ, Lin L (2010) Breast elastography: a hospital-based preliminary study in China. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 11(3):809-814
33. Moon WK, Choi JW, Cho N, Park SH, Chang JM, Jang M et al (2010) Computer-aided analysis of ultrasound elasticity images for classification of benign and malignant breast masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195(6):1460-1465
34. Lee JH, Kim SH, Kang BJ, Choi JJ, Jeong SH, Yim HW et al (2011) Role and clinical usefulness of elastography in small breast masses. Acad Radiol 18(1):74-80
35. Satake H, Nishio A, Ikeda M, Ishigaki S, Shimamoto K, Hirano M et al (2011) Predictive value for malignancy of suspicious breast masses of BI-RADS categories 4 and 5 using ultrasound elastography and MR diffusion-weighted imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196(1):202-209
36. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C (1997) Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315(7109):629-634 (Pubitemid 27387172)
37. Pham B, Platt R, McAuley L, Klassen TP, Moher D (2001) Is there a "best" way to detect and minimize publication bias? An empirical evaluation. Eval Health Prof 24(2):109-125 (Pubitemid 33089374)
38. Tang S, Huang G, Liu J, Liu T, Treven L, Song S et al (2011) Usefulness of (18) F-FDGPET, combined FDG-PET/CT and EUS in diagnosing primary pancreatic carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 78:142-150
39. Burnside ES, Hall TJ, Sommer AM, Hesley GK, Sisney GA, Svensson WE et al (2007) Differentiating benign from malignant solid breast masses with US strain imaging. Radiology 245(2):401-410 (Pubitemid 47612520)
40. Regner DM, Hesley GK, Hangiandreou NJ, Morton MJ, Nordland MR, Meixner DD et al (2006) Breast lesions: evaluation with US strain imaging-clinical experience of multiple observers. Radiology 238(2):425-437 (Pubitemid 43134355)