ArticleEuropean radiology2010
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the characterisation of breast masses: utility of quantitative analysis in comparison with MRI.
Article in European radiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the diagnostic capability of automated breast ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound in breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Diagnostic Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography With SonoVue in the Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Breast Lesions: A Meta-Analysis.Technology in cancer research & treatmentPooled it
- CEUS helps to rerate small breast tumors of BI-RADS category 3 and category 4.BioMed research international · 2014Trial
- Advantages of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the localization and diagnostics of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer.Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B · 2023Article
- Modern Imaging Techniques in the Study and Disease Diagnosis of the Mammary Glands of Animals.Veterinary sciences · 2023Review
- B-Mode and Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography Aspects of Benign and Malignant Superficial Neoplasms in Dogs: A Preliminary Study.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
- Qualitative analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the diagnosis of small, TR3-5 benign and malignant thyroid nodules measuring ≤1 cm.The British journal of radiology · 2020Article
- Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Imaging of Breast Masses: Adjunct Tool to Decrease the Number of False-Positive Biopsy Results.Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2019Article
- Diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and enhanced magnetic resonance for breast nodules.Journal of biomedical research · 2018Article
- Up-to-date Doppler techniques for breast tumor vascularity: superb microvascular imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasound.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2018Review
- Ultrasound Imaging Technologies for Breast Cancer Detection and Management: A Review.Ultrasound in medicine & biology · 2018Review
- Diagnosis of sub-centimetre breast lesions: combining BI-RADS-US with strain elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound-a preliminary study in China.European radiology · 2017Article
- Accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Compared With Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Assessing the Tumor Response After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer.Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2017Article
- Predictive model for contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the breast: Is it feasible in malignant risk assessment of breast imaging reporting and data system 4 lesions?World journal of radiology · 2016Article
- Ability of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography to determine clinical responses of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.Japanese journal of clinical oncology · 2016Article
- Quantitative correlational study of microbubble-enhanced ultrasound imaging and magnetic resonance imaging of glioma and early response to radiotherapy in a rat model.Medical physics · 2015Article
- Can Doppler or contrast-enhanced ultrasound analysis add diagnostically important information about the nature of breast lesions?Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2014Article
- Breast contrast-enhanced ultrasound: is a scoring system feasible? A preliminary study in China.PloS one · 2014Article
- Correlation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound kinetics with prognostic factors in invasive breast cancer.European radiology · 2013Article
- Diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound parametric imaging in breast tumors.Journal of breast cancer · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the reliability of contrast-enhanced ultrasound quantitative analysis (CE-US) in characterizing breast lesions, in comparison with MRI. MATERIALS: Thirty-nine patients with breast lesions BI-RADS 3-5 at US or mammography underwent CE-US and MRI. All lesions underwent histological and quantitative enhancement evaluation with both imaging methods. B-mode US, colour/power Doppler US and CE-US were used; an amplitude and phase modulation technique (CPS) read the signals produced by microbubbles and dedicated software produced the following parameters on time/intensity (T/I) curves: peak %, time to peak (TTP), mean transit time (MTT), regional blood volume (RBV) and regional blood flow (RBF). Student's t test was used to calculate the diagnostic accuracy of CE-US parameters compared with histological results. MRI (1.5 T) was performed before and after bolus gadolinium enhancement. Time/intensity curves were generated for all nodules and Fischer's multimodal score was used to classify them.
resultsPathology showed 43 nodules (11 benign; 32 malignant). Peak and RBF were the most significant parameters in differential diagnosis, with p values of 0.02 and 0.004, respectively. Positive predictive value (PPV) of CE-US evaluation was 91%, negative predictive value (NPV) was 73% with a high concordance index (k = 0.59) with MRI.
conclusionsCE-US quantitative analysis offers an objective and reproducible assessment of lesion vascularisation, with good correlation with the results of MRI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.