Development of array piezoelectric fingers towards in vivo breast tumor detection

Abstract

We have investigated the development of a handheld 4 × 1 piezoelectric finger (PEF) array breast tumor detector system towards in vivo patient testing, particularly, on how the duration of the DC applied voltage, the depression depth of the handheld unit, and breast density affect the PEF detection sensitivity on 40 patients. The tests were blinded and carried out in four phases: with DC voltage durations 5, 3, 2, to 0.8 s corresponding to scanning a quadrant, a half, a whole breast, and both breasts within 30 min, respectively. The results showed that PEF detection sensitivity was unaffected by shortening the applied voltage duration from 5 to 0.8 s nor was it affected by increasing the depression depth from 2 to 6 mm. Over the 40 patients, PEF detected 46 of the 48 lesions (46/48)-with the smallest lesion detected being 5 mm in size. Of 28 patients (some have more than one lesion) with mammography records, PEF detected 31/33 of all lesions (94%) and 14/15 of malignant lesions (93%), while mammography detected 30/33 of all lesions (91%) and 12/15 of malignant lesions (80%), indicating that PEF could detect malignant lesions not detectable by mammography without significantly increasing false positives. PEF's detection sensitivity is also shown to be independent of breast density, suggesting that PEF could be a potential tool for detecting breast cancer in young women and women with dense breasts. Published by AIP Publishing. [http://dx

Early Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

“…Piezoelectric immunosensors have been developed to identify specific antibody immunity in breast cancer patents. Xu et al [ 15 ] developed a piezoelectric finger (PEF) for identifying breast cancer and tested it on human subjects. In their study, PEF detected 94% of all tumors and 93% of malignant tumors, while mammography detected 91% of all tumors and 80% of malignant tumors.…”

“…Several MI methods have been developed and evaluated in numerical and experimental settings. Recent clinical studies suggested that investigators should perhaps pay more attention to the development of MI prototypes for clinical environment with particular focus on high sensitivity radio frequency (RF) sensors and sensor arrays [ 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ].…”

A model study of 3-dimensional localization of breast tumors using piezoelectric fingers of different probe sizes

“…The smallest tumor detected by the PEF was 2 mm × 5 mm. 39,40 Furthermore, our previous model tissue studies have also shown that the detectable depth by a PEF was approximately twice that of the probe size of the PEF. 37,40 In other words, with a larger probe size, a PEF can assess the elastic response of the tissue at a larger depth.…”

“…39,40 Furthermore, our previous model tissue studies have also shown that the detectable depth by a PEF was approximately twice that of the probe size of the PEF. 37,40 In other words, with a larger probe size, a PEF can assess the elastic response of the tissue at a larger depth. It is therefore possible to use a set of PEFs each with a different probe size to do the elastic modulus measurements on the same tissue and use the obtained results to deduce the tissue elastic modulus profile in the depth direction without the need of any inversion simulations.…”

“…In our previous in vivo study, PEF has been tested on 40 patients and demonstrated that it could detect most types of breast tumors in vivo including fibroadenomas, cysts, invasive carcinomas, and ductal carcinomas in situ. 39,40 The overall sensitivity of the PEF test was 87%. In women who were 40 years old or younger, the overall sensitivity was 100%.…”