Supine versus Prone 3D Abus Accuracy in Breast Tumor Size Evaluation
Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with negative resection margins decreases the locoregional recurrence rate. Breast cancer size is one of the main determinants of Tumor-Node-Metastasis (TNM) staging. Our study aimed to investigate the accuracy of supine 3D automated breast ultrasound (3D ABUS) compared to prone 3D ABUS in the evaluation of tumor size in breast cancer patient candidates for BCS. In this prospective two-center study (Groups 1 and 2), we enrolled patients with percutaneous biopsy-proven early-stage breast cancer, in the period between June 2019 and May 2020. Patients underwent hand-held ultrasound (HHUS), contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) and 3D ABUS-supine 3D ABUS in Group 1 and prone 3D ABUS in Group 2. Histopathological examination (HE) was considered the reference standard. Bland-Altman analysis and plots were used. Eighty-eight patients were enrolled. Compared to prone, supine 3D ABUS showed better agreement with HE, with a slight tendency toward underestimation (mean difference of -2 mm). Supine 3D ABUS appears to be a useful tool and more accurate than HHUS in the staging of breast cancer.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2022 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2022 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:8 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) - 8(2022), 4 vom: 12. Aug., Seite 1997-2009 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
D'Angelo, Anna [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
3D automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 29.08.2022 Date Revised 04.10.2022 published: Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.3390/tomography8040167 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM345244877 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM345244877 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231226024626.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231226s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.3390/tomography8040167 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1150.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM345244877 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)36006065 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a D'Angelo, Anna |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Supine versus Prone 3D Abus Accuracy in Breast Tumor Size Evaluation |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2022 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 29.08.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 04.10.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with negative resection margins decreases the locoregional recurrence rate. Breast cancer size is one of the main determinants of Tumor-Node-Metastasis (TNM) staging. Our study aimed to investigate the accuracy of supine 3D automated breast ultrasound (3D ABUS) compared to prone 3D ABUS in the evaluation of tumor size in breast cancer patient candidates for BCS. In this prospective two-center study (Groups 1 and 2), we enrolled patients with percutaneous biopsy-proven early-stage breast cancer, in the period between June 2019 and May 2020. Patients underwent hand-held ultrasound (HHUS), contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) and 3D ABUS-supine 3D ABUS in Group 1 and prone 3D ABUS in Group 2. Histopathological examination (HE) was considered the reference standard. Bland-Altman analysis and plots were used. Eighty-eight patients were enrolled. Compared to prone, supine 3D ABUS showed better agreement with HE, with a slight tendency toward underestimation (mean difference of -2 mm). Supine 3D ABUS appears to be a useful tool and more accurate than HHUS in the staging of breast cancer | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a 3D automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) | |
| 650 | 4 | |a breast cancer | |
| 650 | 4 | |a breast imaging | |
| 650 | 4 | |a hand-held ultrasound (HHUS) | |
| 650 | 4 | |a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gatta, Gianluca |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Di Grezia, Graziella |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Mercogliano, Sara |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ferrara, Francesca |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Trombadori, Charlotte Marguerite Lucille |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Franco, Antonio |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Cina, Alessandro |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Belli, Paolo |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Manfredi, Riccardo |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) |d 2015 |g 8(2022), 4 vom: 12. Aug., Seite 1997-2009 |w (DE-627)NLM25464306X |x 2379-139X |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:8 |g year:2022 |g number:4 |g day:12 |g month:08 |g pages:1997-2009 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/tomography8040167 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 8 |j 2022 |e 4 |b 12 |c 08 |h 1997-2009 | ||