| Zheng Wang,Hongzhi Chen,Xiaobin Ma,Zhijun Dai,Shuai Lin,Huafeng Kang. The accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound in evaluating the size of early-stage breast neoplasms. Oncol Transl Med, 2016, 2: 169-173. |
| The accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound in evaluating the size of early-stage breast neoplasms |
| Received:January 20, 2016 Revised:August 21, 2016 |
| View Full Text View/Add Comment Download reader |
| KeyWord:breast neoplasm; magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); ultrasound; pathology |
| Author Name | Affiliation | E-mail | | Zheng Wang | Department of Oncology, The Central Hospital of Xi’an City, Xi’an 710004, China | 836488298@qq.com | | Hongzhi Chen | Department of Oncology, The Central Hospital of Xi’an City, Xi’an 710004, China | 340140990@qq.com | | Xiaobin Ma | Department of Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710004, China | 16962587@qq.com | | Zhijun Dai | Department of Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710004, China | dzj0911@126.com | | Shuai Lin | Department of Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710004, China | 527061281@qq.com | | Huafeng Kang | Department of Oncology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710004, China | kanghuafeng1973@126.com |
|
| Hits: 6700 |
| Download times: 7415 |
| Abstract: |
| Objective: Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in women. Accurate evaluation of the
size and extent of the tumor is crucial in selecting a suitable surgical method for patients with breast cancer.
Both overestimation and underestimation have important adverse effects on patient care. This study aimed
to evaluate the accuracy of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) examination for
measuring the size and extent of early-stage breast neoplasms.
Methods: The longest diameter of breast tumors in patients with T1–2N0–1M0 invasive breast cancer preparing
for breast-conserving surgery (BCS) was measured preoperatively by using both MRI and US and their
accuracy was compared with that of postoperative pathologic examination. If the diameter difference was
within 2 mm, it was considered to be consistent with pathologic examination.
Results: A total of 36 patients were imaged using both MRI and US. The mean longest diameter of the tumors
on MRI, US, and postoperative pathologic examination was 20.86 mm ± 4.09 mm (range: 11–27 mm),
16.14 mm ± 4.91 mm (range: 6–26 mm), and 18.36 mm ± 3.88 mm (range: 9–24 mm). US examination
underestimated the size of the tumor compared to that determined using pathologic examination (t = 3.49,
P < 0.01), while MRI overestimated it (t = ?6.35, P < 0.01). The linear correlation coefficients between the
image measurements and pathologic tumor size were r = 0.826 (P < 0.01) for MRI and r = 0.645 (P < 0.01)
for US. The rate of consistency of MRI and US compared to that with pathologic examination was 88.89%
and 80.65%, respectively, and there was no statistically significant difference between them (χ2 = 0.80,
P > 0.05).
Conclusion: MRI and US are both effective methods to assess the size of breast tumors, and they maintain
good consistency with pathologic examination. MRI has a better correlation with pathology. However,
we should be careful about the risk of inaccurate size estimation. |
| Close |
|
|
|