Combined Application Of Two-dimensional Ultrasound And Ultrasonic Elastography In Benign And Malignant Breast Tumors

Objective:To Analyze and study diagnostic value of benign and malignant breast lumpsof ultrasonic elastography technology by measuring various types of breast lumps ultrasonic tissue ultrasonic elastography parame ters.Materials and Methods:76cases of female patients were admitted as basic research subjects by breast surgery in our hospital from March2012to June2013. All selected objects were confirmed by pathology, and there were106pcs of breast lumps in total among76patients. Maximum diameter of breast lumps of research subjects were less than5.0cm, no preoperative chemotherapy and radiation therapy was applied, conventional two‐dimensional ultrasound (2D‐US) was applied to exame, and switched to ultrasound elastography mode, the operation would be interested in regional survey tumor size generally about2‐fold, based on the quality index (QF) on the display to QF>50‐75trusted image quality check standards. The Color Doppler Flow Imaging (CDFI) and Acuson S2000elastography of diasonograph from Germany’s Siemens were applied to exame, the postoperative pathologic results was confirmed inspection results of gold standard. Three times of reexamination and the test result were counted on the average, the number of inter‐breast lumps data was subject to statistical analysis us ing X2test,the results were analyzed by SPSS14.0software to p <0.05indicates significant difference.Results:1.Diagnosis results of histopathological gold standard for106pcs of breast lumps:79were benign tumors and27were malignant tumors.2.Conventional ultrasound diagnosis on breast lumps generated the sensitivity at81.48%(22/27), the specificity at68.35%(54/79), the accuracy at71.70%(76/106), the positive predictive value at46.81%(22/47) and the negative predictive value at91.53%(54/59).3.UE in the diagnosis of79benign lesions, scoring6278.48%(62/79) below level3,4class above1721.52%(17/79);27malignant lesions, level35below18.52%(5/27),4class above2281.48%(22/27).4.Conventional ultrasound and UE joint diagnosis showed the sensitivity at92.59%(25/27) accuracy, the specificity at94.94%(75/79), the accuracy at94.94%(102/106), the positive predictive value at86.21%(25/29), and the negative predictive value at97.40%(75/77).Conclusion:1. Three methods including regular ultrasound diagnosis, ultrasonic elastography scoring, conventional ultrasound diagnosis combined ultrasonic elastography scoring have certain clinical values to the diagnosis of breast lumps, but single application of one of the three daignosis on the differences between benign, malignancy and sensitivity of tumor were not of significantly statistical significance (p>0.05). 2. The sensitivity, accuracy and specificity of joint diagnosis on breast lumps were significantly higher than that results of2D and UE diagnosis.3. The inter‐positive predictive value of three method was statistically significant (p <0.05), but the inter‐negative predictive value was not statistically significant (p>0.05).4.Certain differences were found in ultrasonic elastographytechnology and combined diagnosis methodsin the evaluation of breast cancer, but their values are affirmaive in diagnozing benign and malignant lumps of breast disease...