This poster is published under an
open license. Please read the
disclaimer for further details.
Keywords:
Breast, Oncology, Ultrasound, Elastography, MR, Diagnostic procedure, Cancer, Neoplasia
Authors:
O. Catalano1, R. Fusco2, M. Di Bonito1, A. Nunziata3, V. Nunziata1, S. Filice1, A. Petrillo1; 1Naples/IT, 2Naples, It/IT, 3Ercolano/IT
DOI:
10.1594/ecr2016/C-0519
Conclusion
It is known that all imaging modalities may have difficulties in accurately measuring breast cancer (Fig. 26).
A recent article has evaluated the potential application of elastography to measure breast cancer (Fig. 27).
There was no significant advantage of elastography,
although a tendency was apparent.
Elastography had a lower interobserver variability in comparison with US.
This study,
however,
did not considered however MRI and included benign lesions too.
In a small study US was found to slightly,
but non significantly,
undersize breast cancer while elastography overestimated the maximum tumor size (Fig. 28).
The preliminary analysis of our results allows to consider MRI as the most accurate modality in measuring breast tumor size in comparison with the pathological gold standard.
MRI has the lowest interobserver variability.
In well-defined breast lesions the differences between the different imaging modalities are very small,
increasing in the case of ill-defined or diffuse lesions.
Discrepancies are greater in the case of lobular tumors comparted to other histotypes.
Both US and elastography tend to underestimate breast tumor size.
In selected cases,
a combined measure,
taking in consideration both US and elastography data,
may allow obtaining a better measurement.