Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30597640›Full record

ArticleJournal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine2019

Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Imaging of Breast Masses: Adjunct Tool to Decrease the Number of False-Positive Biopsy Results.

Sandy C Lee, Hisham Tchelepi, Edward Grant, Bhushan Desai, Chunqiao Luo, Susan Groshen, Linda Hovanessian-Larsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of breast fibromatosis: a case report.The Journal of international medical research · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Sandy C LeeDepartments of Radiology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2158-6234
Hisham TchelepiDepartments of Radiology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Edward GrantDepartments of Radiology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Bhushan DesaiDepartments of Radiology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Chunqiao LuoPreventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Susan GroshenPreventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Linda Hovanessian-LarsenDepartments of Radiology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.

Funding

USC/NORRIS COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER (CORE) SUPPORTP30CA014089 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Saul Priceman · 1985 to 2026
$181.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA 014089NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014089Wright Foundation Grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis pilot study evaluated use of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) to reduce the number of benign breast masses recommended for biopsy.

methodsThis prospective study included 131 consenting women, from October 2016 to June 2017, with American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category 4a, 4b, and 4c masses detected by mammography, conventional ultrasound (US), or both. Contrast-enhanced US examinations (using intravenous injection of perflutren lipid microspheres or sulfur hexafluoride lipid-type A microspheres) were performed before biopsy. Qualitative and quantitative CEUS parameters were compared with reference standard histopathologic results from biopsy of 131 masses.

resultsThere were 109 benign, 6 high-risk, and 16 malignant masses, with a median size of 12 mm (range, 4 to 48 mm) on conventional US imaging. Of 131 masses, 93 (71%) enhanced on CEUS imaging, including 73 of 109 (67%) benign, 6 of 6 (100%) high-risk, and 14 of 16 (87.5%) malignant. Thirty-eight lesions did not enhance, including 36 of 109 (33%) benign and 2 of 16 (12.5%) malignant. Prediction models using recursive petitioning revealed that CEUS may reduce 31% (95% confidence interval, 23%, 40%) of benign biopsies for masses that are: nonenhancing with circumscribed margins or enhancing with an oval shape and homogeneous enhancement. Quantitative parameters indicated that benign masses had the longest time to peak (P = .078), highest time-to-peak ratio of mass to background (P = .036), lowest peak intensity (P = .021), and smallest difference in peak intensity between the mass and background (P = .079) compared to high-risk and malignant lesions.

conclusionsContrast-enhanced US may be a valuable modality that can be used to predict benign pathologic results of breast masses, thereby reducing the number of biopsies.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaAdolescentAdultAgedBreastBreast NeoplasmsDiagnosis, DifferentialFalse Positive ReactionsFemaleHumansImage EnhancementMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsUltrasonography, MammaryContrast MediabiopsyBreast Imaging Reporting and Data System category 4breast masscontrast-enhanced ultrasoundultrasound

Identifiers

PMID30597640
PMCPMC7735954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.