切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华乳腺病杂志(电子版) ›› 2019, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (06) : 343 -349. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0807.2019.06.005

所属专题: 文献

论著

超声光散射成像乳腺诊断系统对T1期乳腺癌的诊断价值
韩晓蓉1,(), 梁琦1, 宁平1, 刘泽宇1, 田春祥1, 吕欣霖1, 陈军1, 何佩语1, 黄琴1   
  1. 1. 610091 成都市妇女儿童中心医院乳腺科
  • 收稿日期:2019-04-25 出版日期:2019-12-01
  • 通信作者: 韩晓蓉
  • 基金资助:
    成都市科技局科技惠民技术研发项目(2015-HM01-00644-SF)

Diagnostic value of ultrasound diffusion breast imaging system for breast cancer of T1 stage

Xiaorong Han1,(), Qi Liang1, Ping Ning1, Zeyu Liu1, Chunxiang Tian1, Xinlin Lyu1, Jun Chen1, Peiyu He1, Qin Huang1   

  1. 1. Department of Breast Surgery, Chengdu Women’s and Children’s Central Hospital, Chengdu 610091, China
  • Received:2019-04-25 Published:2019-12-01
  • Corresponding author: Xiaorong Han
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Han Xiaorong, Email:
引用本文:

韩晓蓉, 梁琦, 宁平, 刘泽宇, 田春祥, 吕欣霖, 陈军, 何佩语, 黄琴. 超声光散射成像乳腺诊断系统对T1期乳腺癌的诊断价值[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2019, 13(06): 343-349.

Xiaorong Han, Qi Liang, Ping Ning, Zeyu Liu, Chunxiang Tian, Xinlin Lyu, Jun Chen, Peiyu He, Qin Huang. Diagnostic value of ultrasound diffusion breast imaging system for breast cancer of T1 stage[J]. Chinese Journal of Breast Disease(Electronic Edition), 2019, 13(06): 343-349.

目的

探讨超声光散射乳腺诊断系统(简称乳光超)对T1期乳腺癌的诊断价值。

方法

本研究共纳入2016年4月至2018年4月到成都市妇女儿童中心医院治疗的超声检查3级及以上(排除6级)患者共2 245例。患者同时完成了超声及乳光超检查,其中,经活组织检查且有完整病理资料的患者共1 157例,对其资料进行回顾性分析。按肿瘤最大直径将1 157例分为3组:S1组(≤1.0 cm)共452例,S2组(1.1~2.0 cm)共489例,S3组(>2.0 cm)共216例。采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析2种检查方法的诊断效能,计算ROC曲线下面积及95%CI, ROC曲线下面积的比较采用Medcalc V19.0.4软件行Z检验。2种方法敏感度及特异度的比较采用χ2检验或Fisher确切概率法;2种方法分别与病理检查结果比较,采用配对χ2检验(McNemar检验)。

结果

1 157例中,恶性144例(12.4%),全部为浸润性导管癌,良性1 013例(87.6%),其中纤维腺瘤852例,导管内乳头状瘤49例,腺病112例。超声诊断乳腺癌的敏感度和特异度分别为90.2%(130/144)和67.7%(686/1 013),诊断准确率为70.5(816/1 157),乳光超诊断乳腺癌的敏感度和特异度分别为94.4% (136/144)和81.8%(829/1 013),诊断准确率为83.4% (965/1 157)。2种方法比较,乳光超诊断的敏感度与超声相比,差异无统计学意义(χ2=1.772,P=0.183),但乳光超的诊断准确率及特异度比超声高(χ2=55.148,P<0.001,χ2=53.515,P<0.001)。ROC曲线结果显示:对0~1.0 cm及1.1~2.0 cm肿块,乳光超诊断效能优于超声(Z=2.384,P=0.034;Z=3.962, P<0.001);而对于>2.0 cm的肿块,乳光超的诊断效能与超声比较,差异无统计学意义(Z=1.911, P=0.056)。亚组分析显示:对于0~1.0 cm小肿块,乳光超特异度为85.7%(359/419),高于超声特异度72.3%(303/419)(χ2=22.555,P<0.001)。对于1.1~2.0 cm小肿块,乳光超特异度为80.4%(349/434),高于超声特异度66.1%(287/434)(χ2=22.613,P<0.001)。对于>2.0 cm肿块,乳光超特异度为73.1%(117/160),超声特异度为58.1%(93/160),乳光超特异度优于超声(χ2=7.979,P=0.005)。各亚组中,乳光超与超声的敏感度比较,差异均无统计学意义(P=0.427; χ2=0.374,P=0.541; P=1.000)。

结论

乳光超对T1期乳腺癌的诊断优于超声,可作为早期乳腺癌诊断的有效手段之一。

Objective

To investigate the application of the ultrasound diffusion breast imaging(UDBI) system in the diagnosis of T1 stage breast cancer.

Methods

Totally 2 245 patients with ultrasound grade 3 and above (the patients in grade 6 were excluded) in the Chengdu Women’s and Children’s Central Hospital from April 2016 to April 2018 were included in this study. The patients underwent both ultrasonography and UDBI. Among them, 1 157 patients underwent biopsy, with complete pathological data, so they were retrospectively analyzed. According to the maximum diameter of the tumor, 1 157 cases were divided into 3 groups: 452 cases in S1 group (≤1.0 cm), 489 cases in S2 group (1.1-2.0 cm), and 216 cases in S3 group (>2.0 cm). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to analyze the diagnostic performance of the two methods. The area under the ROC curve and 95%CI were calculated accordingly. The area under the ROC curve was compared by Z test using the Medcalc V19.0.4 software. The sensitivity and specificity of the two methods were compared by χ2 test or Fisher exact test. The paired χ2 test (McNemar test) was used to compare the two methods with pathological results.

Results

Among the 1 157 cases, there were 144 cases of malignant tumor (12.4%), confirmed as invasive ductal carcinoma, 1 013 cases of benign disease (87.6%), including 852 cases of fibroadenoma, 49 intraductal papilloma and 112 adenosis. The sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy in the diagnosis of breast cancer were 90.2% (130/144), 67.7% (686/1 013) and 70.5 (816/1 157) by ultrasound, 94.4% (136/144), 81.8% (829/1 013) and 83.4% (965/1 157) by UDBI, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy and specificity of UDBI were significantly higher than those of ultrasound (χ2=55.148, P<0.001, χ2=53.515, P<0.001), while the sensitivity of the two methods showed no significant difference(χ2=1.772, P=0.183). The ROC curve showed that for the tumor with the diameter of 0-1.0 cm or 1.1-2.0 cm, the diagnostic performance of UDBI was superior to that of the ultrasound (Z=2.384, P=0.034; Z=3.962, P<0.001); for the tumor with the diameter >2.0 cm, there was no significant difference in the diagnostic performance between UDBI and ultrasound (Z=1.911, P=0.056). Subgroup analysis showed that for the tumor with the diameter of 0-1.0 cm, the specificity of UDBI was significantly higher than that of ultrasound [85.7% (359/419) vs 72.3% (303/419), χ2=22.555, P<0.001]. For the tumor with the diameter of 1.1-2.0 cm, the specificity of UDBI was significantly higher than that of ultrasound [80.4% (349/434) vs 66.1% (287/434), χ2=22.613, P<0.001]. For the tumor with the diameter >2.0 cm, the specificity of UDBI was significantly higher than that of ultrasound [73.1% (117/160) vs 58.1% (93/160), χ2=7.979, P=0.005]. There was no significant difference in the sensitivity between UDBI and ultrasound in each subgroup (P=0.427; χ2=0.374, P=0.541; P=1.000).

Conclusion

The UDBI is superior to ultrasound in the diagnosis of breast cancer of T1 stage, which can be used as an effective method for early breast cancer diagnosis.

图1 SDI-RADS 3级乳腺纤维腺瘤患者的乳腺超声光散射成像 a图所示为超声图;b 图所示为光学分析图像
图2 SDI-RADS 4B级的乳腺浸润性癌患者的乳腺超声光散射图像 a图所示为超声图;b 图所示为光学分析图像
表1 乳腺超声与病理检查结果比较(例)
表2 乳腺超声光散射成像与病理检查结果比较(例)
表3 乳腺超声光散射成像与超声诊断的准确性比较(例)
图3 用超声及乳腺超声光散射成像诊断不同大小乳腺肿块的ROC曲线 a、b、c图分别代表0~1.0 cm、1.1~2.0 cm、>2.0 cm 肿块的ROC曲线
表4 乳腺超声光散射成像与病理检查对不同大小肿块的诊断结果(例)
表5 乳腺超声与病理检查对不同大小肿块的诊断结果(例)
[1]
Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide:sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012[J].Int J Cancer, 2015, 136(5):E359-E386.
[2]
Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, National Cancer Institute. Cancer stat facts: female breast cancer[EB/OL].

URL    
[3]
陈万青,郑荣寿,张思维,等. 2012年中国恶性肿瘤发病和死亡分析[J]. 中国肿瘤,2016,25(1):1-8.
[4]
王颀,连臻强. 中国乳腺癌筛查与早期诊断的现状及挑战[J]. 肿瘤学杂志,2011,17(5):321-324.
[5]
中国抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会.中国抗癌协会乳腺癌诊治指南与规范(2017年版)[J].中国癌症杂志,2017,27(9):695-759.
[6]
Liberman L, Menell JH. Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS)[J]. Radiol Clin North Am, 2002, 40(3):409-430.
[7]
Wang Y, Kong WT, Zhou WJ, et al. Application value of shear wave elastography technique in qualitative and quantitative diagnosis of breast masses [J]. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi, 2019, 99(27):2111-2114
[8]
Sim YT, Vinnicombe S, Whelehan P, et al. Value of shear-wave elastography in the diagnosis of symptomatic invasive lobular breast cancer[J].Clin Radiol, 2015, 70(6):604-609
[9]
Caproni N, Marchisio F, Pecchi A, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the characterisation of breast masses: utility of quantitative analysis in comparison with MRI[J]. Eur Radiol, 2010, 20(6):1384-1395.
[10]
Piscaglia F, Nolsøe C, Dietrich CF, et al. The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical practice of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): update 2011 on non-hepatic applications[J]. Ultraschall Med, 2012, 33(1):33-59.
[11]
Wojcinski S, Gyapong S, Farrokh A, et al. Diagnostic performance and inter-observer concordance in lesion detection with the automated breast volume scanner (ABVS) [J]. BMC Med Imaging, 2013,13:36.
[12]
朱琳,李建卫,吴松松,等.超声光散射乳腺成像技术在乳腺病变诊断中的应用[J/CD].中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2010,4(6):876-877.
[13]
李越,赵颖,张斌,等.超声光散射乳腺成像诊断乳腺癌的临床价值[J/CD].中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2009,3(4):398-495.
[14]
邵华,程文,荆慧,等.超声光散射成像在乳腺良恶性肿块鉴别诊断中的应用价值[J].中国临床医学影像杂志,2012,23(8):578-581.
[15]
张沥,曹峰,雷军强. 超声和超声光散射成像系统鉴别诊断良恶性乳腺肿瘤:Meta分析[J]. 中国医学影像技术,2013,29(8):1292-1296.
[16]
徐宏伟,乔辉. 超声光散射断层成像技术在早期乳腺肿块定性诊断中的应用研究[J]. 中国医学装备,2013,10(12): 98-99.
[17]
智文祥,顾新刚,何萍青,等. 超声光散射成像联合常规超声诊断乳腺病灶的临床价值[J]. 中华超声影像杂志,2012,21(7):635-636.
[18]
徐振花,武晨,茅玲,等. 超声光散射成像系统筛查早期乳腺癌[J].中国肿瘤,2011, 20(12):932-936.
[19]
王会东,马腾.超声定位光散射断层成像在乳腺肿瘤诊断中的应用价值[J].潍坊医学院学报,2018,40(5):340-342.
[20]
商聪,宋光,任卫东,等. 超声光散射成像诊断≤2.00 cm乳腺癌[J]. 中国介入影像与治疗学,2015,12(10):630-633.
[1] 魏淑婕, 惠品晶, 丁亚芳, 张白, 颜燕红, 周鹏, 黄亚波. 单侧颈内动脉闭塞患者行颞浅动脉-大脑中动脉搭桥术的脑血流动力学评估[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1046-1055.
[2] 张璇, 马宇童, 苗玉倩, 张云, 吴士文, 党晓楚, 陈颖颖, 钟兆明, 王雪娟, 胡淼, 孙岩峰, 马秀珠, 吕发勤, 寇海燕. 超声对Duchenne肌营养不良儿童膈肌功能的评价[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1068-1073.
[3] 朱连华, 费翔, 韩鹏, 姜波, 李楠, 罗渝昆. 高帧频超声造影在胆囊息肉样病变中的鉴别诊断价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 904-910.
[4] 张梅芳, 谭莹, 朱巧珍, 温昕, 袁鹰, 秦越, 郭洪波, 侯伶秀, 黄文兰, 彭桂艳, 李胜利. 早孕期胎儿头臀长正中矢状切面超声图像的人工智能质控研究[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 945-950.
[5] 陈舜, 薛恩生, 叶琴. PDCA在持续改进超声危急值管理制度中的价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 974-978.
[6] 周钰菡, 肖欢, 唐毅, 杨春江, 周娟, 朱丽容, 徐娟, 牟芳婷. 超声对儿童髋关节暂时性滑膜炎的诊断价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(08): 795-800.
[7] 刘欢颜, 华扬, 贾凌云, 赵新宇, 刘蓓蓓. 颈内动脉闭塞病变管腔结构和血流动力学特征分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(08): 809-815.
[8] 郏亚平, 曾书娥. 含鳞状细胞癌成分的乳腺化生性癌的超声与病理特征分析[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(08): 844-848.
[9] 张丽丽, 陈莉, 余美琴, 聂小艳, 王婧玲, 刘婷. PDCA循环法在超声浅表器官亚专科建设中的应用[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(07): 717-721.
[10] 唐玮, 何融泉, 黄素宁. 深度学习在乳腺癌影像诊疗和预后预测中的应用[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 323-328.
[11] 康夏, 田浩, 钱进, 高源, 缪洪明, 齐晓伟. 骨织素抑制破骨细胞分化改善肿瘤骨转移中骨溶解的机制研究[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 329-339.
[12] 晏晴艳, 雍晓梅, 罗洪, 杜敏. 成都地区老年转移性乳腺癌的预后及生存因素研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 636-638.
[13] 李智铭, 郭晨明, 庄晓晨, 候雪琴, 高军喜. 早期乳腺癌超声造影定性及定量指标的对比研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 639-643.
[14] 廖梅, 张红君, 金洁玚, 吕艳, 任杰. 床旁超声造影对肝移植术后早期肝动脉血栓的诊断价值[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 630-634.
[15] 杨天池, 韩威, 邱枫, 祁佳慧. 术中胰腺超声弹性成像在胰腺质地评估中的应用[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 646-650.
阅读次数
全文


摘要