Comparison of automated versus hand-held breast US in supplemental screening in asymptomatic women with dense breasts: is there a difference regarding woman preference, lesion detection and lesion characterization?

Comparison of medical image interpretation time between conventional and automated methods of breast ultrasound

Objective

To compare the medical image interpretation's time between the conventional and automated methods of breast ultrasound in patients with breast lesions. Secondarily, to evaluate the agreement between the two methods and interobservers.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional study with prospective data collection. The agreement's degrees were established in relation to the breast lesions's ultrasound descriptors. To determine the accuracy of each method, a biopsy of suspicious lesions was performed, considering the histopathological result as the diagnostic gold standard.

Results

We evaluated 27 women. Conventional ultrasound used an average medical time of 10.77 minutes (± 2.55) greater than the average of 7.38 minutes (± 2.06) for automated ultrasound (p<0.001). The degrees of agreement between the methods ranged from 0.75 to 0.95 for researcher 1 and from 0.71 to 0.98 for researcher 2. Among the researchers, the degrees of agreement were between 0.63 and 1 for automated ultrasound and between 0.68 and 1 for conventional ultrasound. The area of the ROC curve for the conventional method was 0.67 (p=0.003) for researcher 1 and 0.72 (p<0.001) for researcher 2. The area of the ROC curve for the automated method was 0. 69 (p=0.001) for researcher 1 and 0.78 (p<0.001) for researcher 2.

Conclusion

We observed less time devoted by the physician to automated ultrasound compared to conventional ultrasound, maintaining accuracy. There was substantial or strong to perfect interobserver agreement and substantial or strong to almost perfect agreement between the methods.

The Automation of Breast Ultrasonography and the Medical Time Dedicated to the Method

In this integrative review, we aimed to describe the records of time devoted by physicians to breast ultrasound in a review of articles in the literature, in order to observe whether the automation of the method enabled a reduction in these values. We selected articles from the Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences (LILACS) and MEDLINE databases, through Virtual Health Library (BVS), SciELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online), PubMed, and Scopus. We obtained 561 articles, and, after excluding duplicates and screening procedures, 9 were selected, whose main information related to the guiding question of the research was synthesized and analyzed. It was concluded that the automation of breast ultrasound represents a possible strategy for optimization of the medical time dedicated to the method, but this needs to be better evaluated in comparative studies between both methods (traditional and automated), with methodology directed to the specific investigation of this potentiality.

The Diagnostic Significance of the BI-RADS Classification Combined With Automated Breast Volume Scanner and Shear Wave Elastography for Breast Lesions

OBJECTIVE

We herein compared the diagnostic accuracy of the BI-RADS, ABVS, SWE, and combined techniques for the classification of breast lesions.

METHODS

Breast lesions were appraised using the BI-RADS classification system as well as the combinations of BI-RADS plus ABVS (BI-RADS + ABVS) and BI-RADS plus SWE (BI-RADS + SWE), and both methods (BI-RADS + ABVS + SWE) by two specialties Medical Ultrasound physician. The Fisher's exact and χ² tests were performed to compare the degree of malignancy for the various methods with a pathology ground truth. Receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) were generated and the corresponding area under the curve (AUC) values were determined to test the diagnostic efficacy of the various methods and identify the optimal SWE cut-off indicative of malignancy.

RESULTS

The incidence of the retraction phenomenon on ABVS images of the malignant group was significantly higher (P < .001) than that of the benign group. The specificity, sensitivity, and positive and negative predictive values of the BI-RADS classification were 88.72, 79.38, 83.70, and 85.50%, respectively. BI-RADS plus SWE-Max exhibited enhanced specificity, sensitivity, and positive and negative predictive values of 88.72, 92.78, 85.70, and 94.40%, respectively. Similarly, when BI-RADS + ABVS was utilized, the sensitivity and negative predictive value increased to 95.88 and 96.40%, respectively. BI-RADS + ABVS + SWE possessed the highest overall sensitivity (96.91%), specificity (94.74%), and positive (93.10%) and negative (97.70%) predictive values from all four indices.

CONCLUSION

ABVS and SWE can reduce the subjectivity of BI-RADS. As a result, BI-RADS + ABVS + SWE resulted in the best diagnostic accuracy.

Evaluation of Diagnostic Performance of Automatic Breast Volume Scanner Compared to Handheld Ultrasound on Different Breast Lesions: A Systematic Review

Objective: To compare the diagnostic performance of the automatic breast volume scanner (ABVS) against the handheld ultrasound (HHUS) in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions. Methods: A systematic search and review of studies involving ABVS and HHUS for breast cancer screening were performed. The search involved the data taken from Scopus, PubMed, and science direct databases and was conducted between the year 2011 to 2020. The prospective method was used in determining the inclusion and exclusion criteria while the evidence level was determined using the BI-RADS categories for diagnostic studies. In addition, the parameters of specificity, mean age, sensitivity, tumor number, and diagnostic accuracy of the ABVS and HHUS were summarized. Results: No systematic review or randomized controlled trial were identified in the systematic search while one cross-sectional study, eight retrospective studies, and 10 prospective studies were found. Sufficient follow-up of the subjects with benign and malignant findings were made only in 10 studies, in which only two had used ABVS and HHUS after performing mammographic screening and MRI. Analysis was made of 21 studies, which included 5448 lesions (4074 benign and 1374 malignant) taken from 6009 patients. The range of sensitivity was (0.72–1.0) for ABVS and (0.62–1.0) for HHUS; the specificity range was (0.52–0.98)% for ABVS and (0.49–0.99)% for HHUS. The accuracy range among the 11 studies was (80–99)% and (59–98)% for the HHUS and ABVS, respectively. The identified tumors had a mean size of 2.1 cm, and the detected cancers had a mean percentage of 94% (81–100)% in comparison to the non-cancer in all studies. Conclusions: The evidence available in the literature points to the fact that the diagnostic performance of both ABVS and HHUS are similar with reference to the differentiation of malignant and benign breast lesions.

Comparison of 3D-Automated Breast Ultrasound With Handheld Breast Ultrasound Regarding Detection and BI-RADS Characterization of Lesions in Dense Breasts: A Study of 592 Cases

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of an automated breast ultrasound system (ABUS) with handheld ultrasound (HHUS) in the detection and characterization of lesions regarding BI-RADS classification in women with dense breasts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After ethical approval, from July 2017 to August 2019, 592 consecutive patients were enrolled in this prospective study. On the same day, patients underwent ABUS followed by HHUS. Three breast radiologists participated in this study. The number and type of lesions and BI-RADS categorization of both ABUS and HHUS examinations of each patient were recorded in an excel file. The level of agreement between the two ultrasound systems in terms of lesion number and BI-RADS category were analyzed statistically.

RESULTS

ABUS and HHUS detected 1005 and 1491 cystic and 270 and 336 mass lesions in 592 patients respectively. ABUS and HHUS detected 171 and 167 positive/suspicious cases (BIRADS 0/3/4/5). Forty suspicious lesions underwent core needle biopsy whereas 11 malignant lesions were detected by both methods. The remaining lesions were followed with a mean of 31 months. The mean size of solid lesions detected by HHUS and ABUS was 7.67 mm (range 2.1-41 mm) and 7.74 mm (range 2-42 mm) respectively. The agreement for detection of cystic lesions between two methods for each breast was good (kappa: 0.61-0.62 p < 0.001). The agreement of two methods for solid mass lesions for each breast was moderate (k = 0.57-0.60 p < 0.001). There was good agreement between the two methods for detecting suspicious lesions (kappa = 0.66 p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The level of agreement of ABUS and HHUS for dichotomic assignment of BIRADS categories was good. Although ABUS detected fewer lesions compared to HHUS, both methods detected all malignant lesions. ABUS is a reliable method for the detection of malignancy in dense breasts.