ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2019
Shear wave versus strain elastography in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Diagnostic and clinical utility of ultrasound elastography for uterine cervical neoplasms-a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Pooled it
- The diagnostic performance of salivary gland ultrasound elastography in Sjögren's syndrome and sicca symptoms: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European radiology · 2024Pooled it
- Determining the elastography strain ratio cut off value for differentiating benign from malignant breast lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2022Pooled it
- Assessing hardness to make things easy! Ultrasonography with elastographic evaluation of soft tissue tumours.Journal of ultrasound · 2026Article
- Elastosonography in the Differential Diagnosis of Musculoskeletal Soft Tissue Tumors: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Evaluating shear wave elastography for differentiating lipomas from low to intermediate grade liposarcomas: is it reproducible and reliable?Skeletal radiology · 2025Article
- Value of virtual touch tissue imaging quantification in diagnosing breast mass-type lesions and nonmass lesions: a comparative analysis.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- ULTRASOUND AND SHEAR WAVE ELASTOGRAPHY FOR DISTINGUISHING BENIGN AND MALIGNANT AXILLARY LYMPH NODES IN BREAST CANCER PATIENTS.Acta clinica Croatica · 2025Article
- Visualizing tactile feedback: an overview of current technologies with a focus on ultrasound elastography.Frontiers in medical technology · 2023Review
- Article
- The diagnostic value of ultrasound and shear wave elastography in the differentiation of benign and malignant soft tissue tumors.Skeletal radiology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: To evaluate and compare the diagnostic performances of shear wave elastography (SWE) and strain elastography (SE) in the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions. Materials and methods: The current study included 87 breast lesions in 84 patients. The Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) categories were determined with ultrasound features. The maximum shear wave velocity (SWV), mean SWV, maximum SWV to fat SWV ratio, and mean SWV to fat SWV ratio were measured using SWE. The strain ratio (SR) was calculated as the ratio of lesion strain to the adjacent fat strain using SE. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to assess and compare the diagnostic performances of each parameter. Results: Forty-five benign and 42 malignant lesions were diagnosed. The sensitivity and specificity of the BIRADS classification was 100% and 35.6%, respectively. Selecting a cutoff SR value of 3.22 led to an 88.1% sensitivity and an 88.4% specificity (AUC: 0.913 [95% CI: 0.854–0.971], P < 0.001). Selecting cutoff maximum SWV value of 3.41 m/s led to an 88.1% sensitivity and an 86.7% specificity (AUC: 0.918 [95% CI: 0.858–0.978], P< 0.001). The diagnostic performance of the maximum SWV, mean SWV, and maximum SWV to fat SWV ratio were similar to the diagnostic performance of the SR (P = 1.00, P= 1.00, P= 0.629, respectively). Conclusion: SE and SWE are both feasible imaging modalities in the differentiation of malignant and benign breast lesions with similar diagnostic performances.
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.