Diagnostic evaluations of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in mammary duct ectasia and breast cancer

Abstract

The objective of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of mammary duct ectasia (MDE) and breast cancer. This retrospective study was performed on 35 patients with MDE and 105 patients with breast cancer using US and MRI. Imaging features, semi-quantitative and quantitative parameters were analyzed to determine their diagnostic value for MDE and breast cancer. The average age of patients with breast cancer was increased compared with that of patients with MDE. There were no significant differences in local packages with or without tenderness ratio (P=0.259) and grade of color Doppler flow imaging (P=0.273) between the two groups. However, the morphological changes were significantly increased in breast cancer compared with MDE. In addition, there were significant diagnostic differences in US and MRI between breast cancer and MDE, including resistance index, US elastography, time-signal intensity curve, apparent diffusion coefficient, early-stage enhancement ratio, peak-of-enhancement ratio and Tpeak (P<0.05). However, there were no observable significant diagnostic differences between US, MRI and US with MRI for MDE and breast cancer (P=0.103, P=0.263 and P=0.403 respectively). Diagnosis of MDE and breast cancer requires full evaluation of multiple parameters and morphological changes of US and MRI to increase the diagnostic efficiency. US, MRI and US with MRI were all of diagnostic value for MDE and breast cancer, while US with MRI had the highest efficacy.

Dynamic Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging versus Ultrasonic Diffused Optical Tomography in Early Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

“…Currently, imaging examination is still the main strategy for early diagnosis of breast cancer, and the two commonly used examination modalities are ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MRI plain scan can accurately localize the lesion morphology, with the help of dynamic contrast-enhancement (DCE) method, the paramagnetic contrast medium is introduced to get the qualitative curve characteristics and quantitative parameters of contrast penetration and clearance inside the tumor, so that the pathological and physiological behavior is intuitively manifested, with the diagnostic efficacy that has been confirmed in common cancers such as cervical cancer and lung cancer [ 8 , 9 ]. Ultrasonic diffused optical tomography (DOT) is a novel functional imaging system capable of reflecting the morphological information and metabolic status of breast masses to achieve the identification and diagnosis of breast cancer.…”

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Features in Diagnosis of Breast Cancer and Evaluation of Effect of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Targeted Therapy

“…A biopsy is a golden standard for the diagnosis of BC, but some in patients with tiny lesions, it is difficult to obtain biopsy tissue, and biopsy can also lead to paralytic fibrosis or even sclerotic mass of breast tissue [ 5 ]. Imaging studies are generally molybdenum target mammography, ultrasound imaging, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) [ 6 – 8 ]. Due to their different imaging principles, each examination method has its shortcomings.…”

Comparison of diagnostic efficacy of ultrasound, ultrasound elastography and magnetic resonance imaging for breast lesions

“…Similar to present study, ElSaid et al [20] , also found US elastography to be comparable to MRI with respect to accuracy (84%) and did not find much difference in sensitivity and specificity of two techniques (84% vs 88% and 84% vs 80%). Song et al also found the sensitivity and specificity of elastography (94.3% and 85.7%) to be too close to that of MRI (96.2% and 91.4%) [29] . In their study, Parajuly et al [30] , reported a higher sensitivity and specificity of conventional USG (91.8% and 84.8%).…”