Xu P, Wu M, Yang M, Xiao J, Ruan ZM, Wu LY. Evaluation of internal and shell stiffness in the differential diagnosis of breast non-mass lesions by shear wave elastography. World J Clin Cases 2020; 8(12): 2510-2519 [PMID: 32607328 DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i12.2510]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Mei Wu, MD, Chief Doctor, Department of Ultrasound, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, No.247 Beiyuan Ave, Jinan 250033, Shandong Province, China. a_may0212@163.com
Research Domain of This Article
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine & Medical Imaging
Article-Type of This Article
Retrospective Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Clin Cases. Jun 26, 2020; 8(12): 2510-2519 Published online Jun 26, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i12.2510
Table 1 Comparison of general information between the benign group and the malignant non-mass lesions group
Group
Age (yr)
Maximum diameter (cm)
Location
Amenorrhea
Lactation history
Left
Right
Yes
No
Yes
No
Benign (n = 66)
49.70 ± 10.38
2.10 ± 1.52
38
28
17
49
55
11
Malignant (n = 52)
50.56 ± 9.27
2.38 ± 1.64
27
25
13
39
44
8
t/χ2 value
-0.205
-0.959
0.376
0.009
0.035
P value
0.419
0.339
0.540
0.925
0.851
Table 2 Comparison of internal elasticity parameters of non-mass lesions (kPa)
Internal parameter
Benign (n = 66)
Malignant (n = 52)
t value
P value
Emax
42.43 ± 20.62
97.95 ± 23.56
-13.634
0.000
Emean
18.34 ± 7.16
32.62 ± 14.98
-6.823
0.000
Emin
4.26 ± 2.05
5.00 ± 2.47
-1.778
0.078
Esd
6.34 ± 3.48
15.39 ± 4.17
-12.848
0.000
Table 3 Comparison of elasticity parameters around non-mass lesions
Peripheral parameter
Benign (n = 66)
Malignant (n = 52)
t/χ2 value
P value
“Stiff rim” sign
6
26
24.628
0.000
Shell at 1 mm
E1 max
45.53 ± 22.81
125.41 ± 35.68
-14.765
0.000
E1 mean
24.94 ± 7.92
45.49 ± 17.71
-8.425
0.000
Shell at 1.5 mm
E1.5 max
46.61 ± 22.39
136.40 ± 38.39
-15.889
0.000
E1.5 mean
25.36 ± 8.52
49.64 ± 18.98
-9.281
0.000
Shell at 2 mm
E2 max
50.43 ± 24.62
153.95 ± 35.56
-18.655
0.000
E2 mean
26.34 ± 7.16
54.62 ± 17.98
-11.668
0.000
Shell at 2.5 mm
E2.5 max
48.43 ± 25.62
167.95 ± 37.56
-20.506
0.000
E2.5 mean
29.34 ± 7.16
69.62 ± 19.98
-15.200
0.000
Shell at 3 mm
E3 max
42.43 ± 20.62
153.95 ± 23.56
-27.386
0.000
E3 mean
26.34 ± 7.16
58.62 ± 14.98
-15.424
0.000
Table 4 Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, cutoff value and the area under the curve of each parameter
Parameter
Sensitivity (%)
Specificity (%)
Accuracy (%)
Cutoff value
AUC
“Stiff rim” sign
50.00
90.91
72.88
-
-
Emax
74.33
66.80
67.05
67.61
0.707
Emean
54.95
68.47
59.86
28.05
0.626
Emin
36.15
49.60
43.64
4.96
0.425
Esd
70.18
63.67
68.93
11.30
0.687
E1 max
83.61
75.01
75.04
84.65
0.795
E1 mean
68.29
57.94
63.69
33.08
0.647
E1.5 max
83.00
74.18
77.00
95.60
0.789
E1.5 mean
74.48
63.95
65.24
36.24
0.692
E2 max
86.36
76.04
80.06
100.50
0.826
E2 mean
75.53
66.11
68.51
33.97
0.704
E2.5 max
94.57
85.86
87.44
94.62
0.900
E2.5 mean
79.05
70.04
80.51
36.17
0.746
E3 max
90.52
81.83
84.03
88.56
0.881
E3 mean
76.82
68.11
76.86
35.48
0.734
Citation: Xu P, Wu M, Yang M, Xiao J, Ruan ZM, Wu LY. Evaluation of internal and shell stiffness in the differential diagnosis of breast non-mass lesions by shear wave elastography. World J Clin Cases 2020; 8(12): 2510-2519