辽宁医学杂志2024,Vol.38Issue(5) :65-69.

常规US,CEUS及DCE-MRI评估乳腺浸润性导管癌病灶的价值

The value of conventional US,CEUS,and DCE-MRI in the evaluation of breast invasive ductal carcinomas

秦基烨 王潇偲 杨岚
辽宁医学杂志2024,Vol.38Issue(5) :65-69.

常规US,CEUS及DCE-MRI评估乳腺浸润性导管癌病灶的价值

The value of conventional US,CEUS,and DCE-MRI in the evaluation of breast invasive ductal carcinomas

秦基烨 1王潇偲 1杨岚1
扫码查看

作者信息

  • 1. 郑州市第七人民医院(河南郑州 450000)
  • 折叠

摘要

目的 探讨常规超声(US)、超声造影(CEUS)及动态对比增强磁共振(DCE-MRI)评估乳腺浸润性导管癌病灶的价值.方法 采用回顾性病例对照研究分析我院2020年10月至2023年2月期间收治的79例疑似乳腺浸润性导管癌患者的病例资料,术前所有患者均完善常规US,CEUS及DCE-MRI检查.金标准为手术病理细胞学检查结果,比较常规US,CEUS及DCE-MRI检测乳腺浸润性导管癌和金标准的诊断效能及对病灶大小的正确度及最大径差异.结果 与手术病理活检结果相比,常规US检出乳腺浸润性导管癌患者67例;检出率为67/71(94.37%),CEUS检出乳腺浸润性导管癌患者69例;检出率为69/71(97.18%);DCE-MRI检出乳腺浸润性导管癌患者70例;检出率为70/71(98.59%);与手术病理活检结果相比,常规US检出病最大灶径小于手术病理活检结果(P<0.05),CEUS检出病最大径大于手术病理活检结果,组间对比无统计学差异(P>0.05);DCE-MRI检出病最大灶径与手术病理活检结果相近,组间对比无统计学差异(P>0.05);常规US测量病灶低估率较CEUS及DCE-MRI检查较高(P<0.05),常规US测量病灶高估率较CEUS及DCE-MRI检查较低,但组间对比无显著性(P>0.05).结论 常规US、CEUS及DCE-MRI均可诊断乳腺浸润性导管癌,但常规US测量病灶易低估病灶最大直径,CEUS及DCE-MRI检查测量易病灶高估最大直径,因此临床上应根据具体情况选择合适的检查方式.

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the value of conventional ultrasound(US),contrast-enhanced ultrasound(CEUS)and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging(DCE-MRI)in the evaluation of breast invasive ductal carcino-mas.Methods A retrospective case-control study was used to analyze the case data of 79 patients with suspected invasive ductal carcinoma of breast admitted to our hospital from October 2020 to February 2023.All patients underwent routine US,CEUS and DCE-MRI examinations before surgery.The gold standard was the results of surgical pathologic cytology.Com-pared with the conventional US,CEUS and DCE-MRI in the detection of breast invasive ductal carcinoma,the diagnostic ef-ficiency and the accuracy of lesion size and maximum diameter difference were compared with the gold standard.Results Compared with the results of operation and pathological biopsy,67 cases of breast infiltrating ductal carcinoma were detected by routine US.The detection rate was 67/71(94.37%),69 cases of breast invasive ductal carcinoma were detected by CEUS.The detection rate was 69/71(97.18%).DCE-MRI detected 70 cases of breast infiltrating ductal carcinoma.The detection rate was 70/71(98.59%).Compared with the results of surgical pathological biopsy,the maximum lesion diame-ter detected by routine US was smaller than that by surgical pathological biopsy(P<0.05),and the maximum lesion diam-eter detected by CEUS was larger than that by surgical pathological biopsy(P>0.05).The maximum lesion diameter de-tected by DCE-MRI was similar to the results of surgical pathological biopsy,but there was no significant difference between groups(P>0.05).The underestimation rate of lesions measured by conventional US was higher than that measured by CEUS and DCE-MRI(P<0.05),and the overestimation rate of lesions measured by conventional US was lower than that measured by CEUS and DCE-MRI,but there was no significant difference between groups(P>0.05).Conclusion Con-ventional US,CEUS and DCE-MRI can all diagnose breast infiltrating ductal carcinoma,but the maximum diameter of the lesions measured by conventional US is likely to be underestimated,while the maximum diameter of the lesions measured by CEUS and DCE-MRI is likely to be overestimated.Therefore,appropriate examination methods should be selected according to specific clinical conditions.

关键词

常规US/CEUS/DCE-MRI/乳腺浸润性导管癌

Key words

Conventional US/CEUS/DCE-MRI/Invasive ductal carcinoma of breast

引用本文复制引用

出版年

2024
辽宁医学杂志
辽宁省医学会

辽宁医学杂志

影响因子:0.339
ISSN:1001-1722
段落导航相关论文