ROC方法评价高频彩超、超声弹性成像及钼靶X线在乳腺病变鉴别诊断中的价值

目的：比较高频彩超、超声弹性成像及钼靶X线对乳腺良恶性病变进行鉴别诊断的价值.材料与方法：回顾分析经病理证实的59例乳腺肿块的高频彩超、钼靶X线、超声弹性成像及高频彩超与弹性成像联合诊断结果的敏感性、特异性、准确性,并对诊断结果进行ROC分析.结果：超声弹性成像诊断乳腺良恶性病灶的准确性93.24％、敏感性89.6％、特异性90.6％,略高于钼靶X线的89.9％、89.7％和84.4％.高频超声诊断乳腺肿块良恶性具有较高的敏感性（75.9％）但特异性较差（62.5％）.高频彩超＋弹性成像组合得到最高的敏感性93.1％,但特异性提高不明显,仅为65.6％.超声弹性成像的AUC值0.958,高于钼靶X线、高频彩超和高频彩超＋弹性成像三者的AUC值（0.921、0.827和0.887）,弹性成像与高频彩超和二者结合的AUC之间的差异具有统计学意义（P=0.0077、0.0416）.结论：超声弹性成像对乳腺病变诊断具有较高的敏感性和特异性,与高频超声联合应用能够明显提高超声检查在乳腺良恶性病变中的鉴别诊断准确性.     

乳腺肿块的超声弹性成像、多普勒超声及X线钼靶检查

目的探讨超声弹性成像、多普勒超声及X线钼靶成像对乳腺肿块的良恶性鉴别诊断价值。方法应用超声弹性成像、多普勒超声及X线钼靶成像对276例患者获手术病理证实的286个乳腺病灶进行检查。结果良性207例共215个病灶,恶性69例共71个病灶,超声弹性成像诊断恶性病变敏感性为88.7%,特异性为96.3%,准确性为94.4%;彩色多普勒血流显像诊断乳腺恶性肿瘤的敏感性为71.8%,特异性为73.5%,准确性为73.1%;脉冲多普勒血流显像诊断乳腺恶性肿瘤的敏感性为73.3%,特异性为58.0%,准确性为64.2%;X线钼靶成像诊断乳腺恶性肿瘤的敏感性为57.8%,特异性为87.4%,准确性为80.1%。结论超声弹性成像鉴别乳腺肿瘤良恶性的准确性较多普勒超声及X线钼靶成像高。     

超声弹性成像与彩色多普勒超声在乳腺占位性病变诊断中的对比研究

目的 比较超声弹性成像超声(UE)与彩色多普勒超声(CDFI)在乳腺占位性病变鉴别诊断中的应用价值.方法 对93例,100个乳腺占位性病灶术前行彩色多普勒和超声弹性成像检查,以手术病理为金标准,对比分析彩色多普勒超声和超声弹性成像诊断乳腺肿块良恶性的准确度.结果 超声弹性成像(UE)诊断乳腺恶性病灶的敏感度90.2%,特异度93.9%,准确度92.0%,彩色多普勒超声中根据肿块内血流情况(对显示最多血管条数的肿块超声切面进行评价)参照Adler分级诊断乳腺恶性病灶的敏感度64.7%,特异度77.5%,准确度71.0%,脉冲多普勒中根据血流的阻力指数(RI)诊断乳腺恶性病灶的敏感度74.5%,特异度71.4%,准确度73.0%.联合彩色多普勒和脉冲多普勒诊断乳腺恶性病灶的灵敏度为50.9%,特异度为89.7%,准确度为70%.结论 超声弹性成像在鉴别诊断乳腺占位性病变良恶性中的准确度高于彩色多普勒超声.     

Comparison of Diffuse Optical Tomography,Ultrasound Elastography and Mammography in the Diagnosis of Breast Tumors

Previous studies have reported the usefulness of diffuse optical tomography (DOT), ultrasound elastography (UE) and mammography in differentiating breast tumors. This study was aimed at evaluating and comparing DOT, UE and mammography with respect to their diagnostic performance in differentiating benign and malignant breast tumors. Of the 67 tumors, 45 were histopathologically benign, and 22 were malignant. UE was the most specific (93.33%) of the three diagnostics modalities. DOT and UE were both more accurate (80.60% and 89.55%, respectively) than mammography (63.08%). UE + mammography (93.33% and 91.04%) and DOT + mammography (77.78% and 82.09%) exhibited higher specificity and accuracy, respectively, than mammography alone (57.78% and 63.08%). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to assess the performance of the modalities. In conclusion, UE and DOT were superior to conventional mammography in terms of both specificity and accuracy. DOT and UE improve the specificity and accuracy of breast cancer diagnosis, and combining the two modalities improves the diagnostic value.     

超声光散射成像联合超声弹性成像诊断乳腺病灶的价值研究

目的对比超声光散射成像系统、超声弹性成像技术及二者联合对乳腺病灶鉴别诊断价值的研究。方法回顾经穿刺活检及手术病理证实的96例患者共116个乳腺病变,分析其超声光散射断层成像系统图像及超声弹性成像图像,并与术后病理及穿刺活检结果对照。结果 116个乳腺肿块术后及穿刺活检病理诊断中良性62个,恶性54个,超声光散射对乳腺癌诊断的敏感度、特异度、准确率、阳性预测值、阴性预测值分别为92.6%、71.0%、81.0%、73.5%、91.7%,超声弹性成像技术分别为77.8%、80.6%、79.3%、77.8%、80.6%,二者联合分别为96.3%、93.5%、94.8%、92.9%、96.7%。结论超声光散射成像系统与超声弹性成像技术各有优势,二者结合有助于提高乳腺病灶鉴别诊断的准确。     

比较超声弹性成像与CDFI鉴别诊断良恶性乳腺病变

目的比较超声弹性成像与CDFI在鉴别诊断良恶性乳腺病变中的应用价值。方法随机选取155例乳腺病变术前患者行超声弹性成像及CDFI检查。CDFI依据Alder血流分级法、弹性成像采用5分法进行评估。以病理结果为金标准,比较两种技术诊断乳腺病变的敏感度、特异度及准确率。结果 155例共检出187个乳腺病灶,其中恶性57个、良性130个。CDFI与弹性评分诊断乳腺病变的敏感度、特异度及准确率分别为68.42%(39/57)、75.38%(98/130)、73.26%(137/187)及84.21%(48/57)、84.62%(110/130)、84.49%(158/187);弹性成像的敏感度及准确率均高于CDFI(P均<0.05),而二者特异度的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。CDFI和弹性成像诊断乳腺病变的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.789及0.892。结论超声弹性成像鉴别诊断乳腺良恶性病变的效能高于CDFI。     

Differential diagnosis of solid breast lesions: contribution of Doppler studies to mammography and gray scale imaging.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the role of Doppler sonography when used in conjunction with mammography and gray scale sonography in differentiating solid breast lesions and to find out whether lesion size is a limiting factor for Doppler evaluation. METHODS: One hundred twelve lesions (70 malignant and 42 benign) detected with mammography and sonography were prospectively examined with color, power, and pulsed Doppler sonography. Vascularity was analyzed morphologically (vessel location, form, and color tone) and semiquantitatively (by spectral indices) to determine the valuable diagnostic flow characteristics. The lesions were classified by 2 observers as benign or malignant on the basis of each diagnostic technique (namely, a combination of mammography and gray scale sonography, presence or absence of blood flow, morphologic flow analysis, and spectral flow analysis). The results were compared with the histologic diagnosis in 105 lesions and with the clinical and radiologic diagnosis after at least 2 years of follow-up in 7 lesions. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of the mammography-gray scale sonography combination were 98.6% and 76.2%, respectively. Neither morphologic nor spectral Doppler analysis proved to be successful on its own, however, information obtained from investigated morphologic and spectral flow features increased the specificity of mammography and gray scale sonography for lesions 10 mm and smaller (from 88.9% to 100%) and those larger than 10 mm (from 70% to 96.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that Doppler sonography is a beneficial adjunct to mammography and gray scale sonography for solid breast lesions 10 mm and smaller and those larger than 10 mm.     

实时超声弹性成像临床应用122例分析

目的:探讨实时超声弹性成像real-time ultrasound elastography(RTE)在鉴别甲状腺结节、肝局灶性病变及乳腺结节良恶性上应用价值。材料与方法:对我院122例(172个结节)病灶进行常规超声及弹性超声检查,其中甲状腺疾病患者40例(44个结节),肝脏疾病患者36例(41个结节),乳腺疾病患者46例(87个结节),结果与病理对照。结果:如弹性评分大于III级及以上诊断,甲状腺恶性结节的灵敏度为100%,特异度为77.1%,准确度81.8%;肝脏恶性结节的灵敏度80%,特异度100%,准确度85.3%;乳腺恶性结节的灵敏度87%,特异度94%,准确度92%。良恶性结节的弹性图像分级差异有统计学差异(P0.05)。结论:RTE在甲状腺良恶性结节,肝脏局灶性病变,乳腺良恶性结节的鉴别诊断中具有较高的临床应用价值。     

超声弹性成像评分标准对乳腺良恶性病变诊断价值的探讨

目的：探讨超声弹性成像（Ultrasonic Elastography，UE）评分标准对乳腺良恶性疾病的诊断价值。方法：应用UE对458例患者共597个乳腺结节进行检查，以手术病理为诊断金标准，评价UE评分标准的意义。结果：评分1，2，3分者诊断乳腺良性病变的准确性分别为97.5%，96.7%，85.7%；UE 4、5分诊断为恶性病变的准确性为88.9%，97.6%。结论：UE 5分评分法有助于评判组织硬度，但仍有待完善。     

超声弹性成像联合乳腺影像报告和数据系统(BI-RADS)分类诊断非肿块型乳腺癌

目的 探讨超声弹性成像（UE）技术联合乳腺影像报告和数据系统（BI-RADS）分类对非肿块型乳腺癌的诊断价值。方法 回顾性分析48例经二维超声及UE诊断、并经病理学证实的局灶性非肿块型乳腺病变患者（共53个病灶）,以手术或穿刺活检病理结果作为金标准,评价超声弹性技术、BI-RADS分类及二者联合诊断非肿块型乳腺癌的价值。结果 53个病灶中,良性21个,恶性32个。UE诊断敏感度、特异度、准确率分别为68.75%、71.43%和69.81%;BI-RADS分类诊断敏感度、特异度和准确率分别为62.50%、66.67%和64.15%（P均>0.05）;UE联合BI-RADS分类的诊断敏感度、特异度、准确率分别为81.25%、80.95%和81.13%,均高于单一UE或BI-RADS分类（P均<0.05）。结论 UE联合BI-RADS分类能提高诊断非肿块型乳腺癌的敏感度、特异度和准确率。     

UE联合BI-RADS诊断乳腺肿块良恶性的价值

目的探讨超声弹性成像技术(UE)联合乳腺影像学报告与数据系统(BI-RADS)诊断乳腺肿块良恶性的价值。方法选取我院就诊的120例乳腺肿块患者为研究对象,均行乳腺超声检查,并以病理结果为金标准。比较UE评分、BI-RADS分级及UE评分联合BI-RADS分级诊断乳腺肿块良恶性的SE、SP、PPV、NPV。结果病理结果显示120例乳腺肿瘤患者的148个肿块病灶中,共有良性病灶83个,恶性病灶65个。UE评分显示恶性病灶69个,BI-RADS分级显示恶性病灶70个,联合诊断出恶性病灶62个。UE评分联合BI-RADS分级诊断的SP、PPV、NPV相比UE评分、BI-RADS分级诊断均较高。结论 UE评分联合BIRADS分级诊断乳腺肿块良恶性的临床效果显著,值得临床应用。     

乳腺肿块超声弹性成像误诊原因分析及对策

目的探讨超声弹性成像对乳腺肿瘤误诊原因及对策。 方法对458例患者共597个乳腺病灶进行了超声弹性成像检查，以手术病理为金标准，对超声弹性成像误诊的原因进行分析。 结果27个恶性病灶误诊为良性，7个良性病灶误诊为恶性。 结论正确掌握超声弹性成像原理和检查方法以及完善评分标准将有助于提高超声弹性成像诊断乳腺肿瘤的准确性。     

应用ROC曲线评价超声弹性成像在甲状腺良恶性结节鉴别诊断中的应用价值

目的探讨超声弹性成像在甲状腺良恶性结节鉴别诊断中的应用价值。方法应用超声弹性成像技术对二维超声检查发现的61例81个甲状腺结节的弹性图像进行评分;按术后病理诊断分为良恶性组,行弹性图像对比分析,并绘制受试者工作特征曲线(ROC曲线),确定诊断界点。结果 61例81个甲状腺结节病理诊断良性66个(良性组),恶性15个(恶性组);良性组弹性图像评分多集中在0～2分(51/66,77.3%),恶性组弹性评分多集中在3～4分(13/15,86.7%),恶性组结节评分明显高于良性组,差异有统计学意义(Z=-3.778,P=0.000)。以弹性评分≥3分为鉴别甲状腺良恶性结节的诊断界点,则诊断灵敏度、特异度及准确性分别为86.7%,81.8%,79.0%;ROC曲线下面积为0.876。结论超声弹性成像有助于对甲状腺良恶性结节进行鉴别诊断,在临床诊断中具有较高的应用价值。     

Contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography in breast lesions: effect on differential diagnosis after mammography and gray scale sonography.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography in the differential diagnosis of breast lesions after a mammography-gray scale sonography combination. METHODS: Sixty-eight patients with 69 breast masses underwent power Doppler sonography before and after intravenous injection of a contrast agent. The lesions were diagnosed as "highly suggestive of malignancy" (category 5; n = 32), "suspicious" (category 4; n = 21), and "probably benign" (category 3; n = 16) by mammography and gray scale sonography, modeled on the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System classification. Power Doppler findings did not affect patient treatment. The authors subjectively evaluated the estimated area of vascularity, degree of enhancement following contrast agent administration, morphologic features, and distribution of vessels within the lesions. RESULTS: The final diagnoses were malignant in 28 lesions and benign in 41. Significant enhancement after contrast agent injection was detected in both the malignant and benign groups. Only 2 criteria, estimated area of vascularity and degree of enhancement following contrast agent administration, proved to be significant diagnostic determinants for contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography (P < .001; interobserver agreements, 74.4 and 77.8, respectively). Contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography provided a higher specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value than power Doppler sonography but a lower sensitivity and negative predictive value than mammography-gray scale sonography. Only in the category 4 lesions could the combination of mammography-gray scale sonography and contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography accomplish a higher specificity (71%) and positive predictive value (70%) than mammography-gray scale sonography (39% and 53%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Power Doppler and contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography cannot be recommended as confirmatory tests in Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category 3 and category 5 lesions. Although contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography may help reduce unnecessary biopsies in Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category 4 lesions, recommendation of its use has many drawbacks, such as imperfectly established criteria, lack of absolute certainty, and high cost.     

超声弹性成像与常规超声对乳腺病灶鉴别诊断价值的对比研究

目的比较常规超声（包括灰阶超声、彩色多普勒血流显像、频谱多普勒超声）及超声弹性成像对良、恶性乳腺肿块的鉴别诊断价值。方法对手术病理证实的475个乳腺病灶的常规超声、超声弹性成像图像进行回顾性分析,用ROC曲线评价其诊断价值。结果超声弹性成像及常规超声诊断乳腺良恶性病灶的ROC曲线下面积（Az）分别为：0.959和0.899,差异有统计学意义（Z=2.7,P〈0.01）。结论在乳腺良恶性病灶的鉴别诊断方面,超声弹性成像的综合诊断价值优于常规超声。     

对乳腺弹性成像5分评分法的进一步探讨

目的进一步探讨乳腺超声弹性成像（UE）5分法判断乳腺病灶良恶性的准确性。 方法对469例乳腺肿物患者共631个肿物进行超声弹性成像检查,对照术后病理结果回顾性分析乳腺肿物良恶性病灶在1～5评分分布的差异。 结果乳腺超声弹性成像评分为1、2分的主要是良性病灶,4、5分的主要是恶性病灶,在这4点上乳腺良恶性病灶的分布差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）;评分为3分的乳腺良恶性病灶的分布差异没有统计学意义（P〉0.05）。 结论3分为乳腺癌良恶性的分界点,要结合临床、二维及彩色多普勒超声检查进行判断,必要时要进行术前病理活检来确定病灶的良恶性。     

超声弹性成像与常规超声诊断肝良恶性肿瘤的价值探讨

目的 比较常规超声和超声弹性成像( ultrasonic elastography,UE)对肝良恶性肿瘤的诊断价值.方法 对145例患者共159个肝病灶进行了常规超声及UE检查,以临床随访及病理结果作为金标准,构建ROC曲线,比较两种方法诊断肝病灶的效率,Kappa值评估检查者之间的一致性.结果检查者之间的一致性UE较常规超声高,κ值分别为0.782和0.325,常规超声、UE及常规超声结合UE的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.76、0.77、0.87,常规超声结合UE能显著提高判别良恶性肿瘤的敏感性和准确性(P＜0.05).结论 UE与常规超声的结合能够提高肝良恶性肿瘤的鉴别诊断能力.     

乳腺良恶性病灶超声造影预测模型在乳腺影像报告与数据系统4类乳腺病灶恶性风险评估中的应用价值

目的构建乳腺良恶性病灶超声造影预测模型,评价其在乳腺影像报告与数据系统（BI-RADS）4类乳腺病灶恶性风险评估中的应用价值。 方法2013年1月至2014年7月在四川省人民医院接受乳腺超声造影检查的230例患者,共235个乳腺实性结节。所有患者经最终穿刺活检或者手术病理结果确诊。通过对既往文献关于乳腺良恶性病灶超声造影模式的分析及本课题组的前期研究和临床经验总结,构建乳腺良恶性病灶超声造影预测模型。以穿刺活检或手术病理结果作为金标准,计算预测乳腺良恶性病灶的超声造影模型鉴别诊断乳腺良恶性病灶的敏感度、特异度、准确性。 结果本组235个乳腺结节,其中乳腺良性结节139个（59.2%）,乳腺恶性结节96个（40.8%）。乳腺良恶性病灶超声造影预测模型鉴别诊断乳腺良恶性病灶的敏感度、特异度及准确性分别为87.01%、86.92%和86.99%。 结论乳腺良恶性病灶超声造影模式存在差异。乳腺良恶性病灶超声造影预测模型可以更好地评估乳腺病灶恶性风险,尤其对BI-RADS 4类乳腺病灶评估更准确。     

超声弹性应变率比值法诊断甲状腺结节良、恶性的价值

目的探讨超声弹性应变率比值法诊断甲状腺结节良、恶性的价值。方法选择行手术治疗的甲状腺结节患者85例（85个甲状腺结节）,均采用超声弹性成像检查。获得超声弹性成像图像后,勾画病灶同侧的胸锁乳突肌和病灶区作为感兴趣区（ROI）,测量其弹性应变率比值,并用受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线来确定良、恶性结节弹性应变率比值的临界值。结果甲状腺良性结节弹性应变率比值为0.94±0.22,甲状腺恶性结节弹性应变率比值为2.67±0.73,二者比较,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。通过ROC曲线确定良、恶性结节弹性应变率比值的临界点为1.45,其准确性、敏感性、特异性分别为92.94%、88.89%、94.03%。结论应用胸锁乳突肌作为对照物测量甲状腺结节弹性应变率比值是可行的,并为临床判断甲状腺结节良、恶性提供依据。     

超声弹性成像联合超声造影在早期乳腺癌诊断中的价值研究

目的探究超声弹性成像联合超声造影在早期乳腺癌中的诊断价值。方法对乳腺病灶切除术患者113例(140个乳腺肿块)分别进行超声弹性成像技术、超声造影、超声弹性成像联合超声造影检查,以病理结果为对照,比较诊断灵敏度、特异度、准确度。结果140个病灶中,恶性90例(病灶98个),良性23例(病灶42个)。超声弹性成像与超声造影诊断早期乳腺癌灵敏度、特异度、准确度分别为73.47%、80.95%、75.71%与77.55%、85.71%、80.00%,差异均无统计学意义(χ^2分别=0.44、0.34、0.74,P均>0.05);超声弹性成像联合超声造影诊断的灵敏度、特异度、准确度分别为91.84%、90.47%、91.43%,灵敏度和准确度均明显高于单纯采用超声弹性成像或超声造影,差异均有统计学意义(χ^2分别=7.71、11.52、7.46、12.59,P均<0.05)。结论超声弹性成像联合超声造影在早期乳腺癌中具有良好诊断效果与鉴别诊断价值。