ArticleJournal of medical ultrasonics (2001)2019
The value of virtual touch tissue imaging quantification in the differential diagnosis between benign and malignant breast lesions.
Article in Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Value of conventional ultrasound and shear‑wave elastography in the assessment of mesenteric lymphadenitis in a paediatric population.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2024Article
- Can measuring perilesional tissue stiffness and stiff rim sign improve the diagnostic performance between benign and malignant breast lesions?Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2021Article
- Qualitative Evaluation of Virtual Touch Imaging Quantification: A Simple and Useful Method in the Diagnosis of Breast Lesions.Cancer management and research · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the value and diagnostic performance of virtual touch tissue imaging quantification (VTIQ) and to determine the optimum cut-off value for differential diagnosis between benign and malignant breast lesions.
methodsConventional ultrasonography (US) and VTIQ were performed in 454 patients with 466 breast lesions with a Siemens Acuson S3000 ultrasound machine. All lesions were assessed by an ultrasound Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) and confirmed by histopathology. The maximum, mean, and minimum shear wave velocity (SWV) values were quantitatively measured in m/s within the regions of interest (ROIs) and ranged from 0.5 to 10 m/s. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of the VTIQ, BI-RADS, and combined data were compared.
resultsAmong the 466 breast lesions, 266 were benign and 200 were malignant. All of the SWV values of the malignant lesions were significantly greater than those of the benign ones (P < 0.05). The optimal cut-off values for SWVmax, SWVmin, SWVmean, and SWVmax/SWVmin obtained from ROC analysis were 5.37 m/s, 3.08 m/s, 4.04 m/s, and 1.83, respectively. Logistic regression analysis revealed that BI-RADS was an independent risk factor for the differential diagnosis of breast lesions, whereas SWV values were not independent risk factors.
conclusionsVTIQ is useful in the differential diagnosis between benign and malignant breast lesions. The combination of VTIQ and ultrasonic BI-RADS can improve the diagnostic performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31102067What 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.