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

Song,Lei; Li,Liang; Liu,Bin; Yu,Dexin; Sun,Fengguo; Guo,Mingming; Ruan,Zhengmin; Zhang,Feixue

doi:10.3892/ol.2017.7514

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

Authors:
- Lei Song
- Liang Li
- Bin Liu
- Dexin Yu
- Fengguo Sun
- Mingming Guo
- Zhengmin Ruan
- Feixue Zhang
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Equipment Division, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250033, P.R. China, Department of Breast Surgery, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250033, P.R. China, Department of Radiology, The First Clinical College, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, Shandong 250033, P.R. China, Department of Radiology, Qilu Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250033, P.R. China, Department of Radiology, Division of MRI, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250033, P.R. China, Department of Radiology, Division of Ultrasound, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250033, P.R. China
Published online on: December 5, 2017 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2017.7514
Pages: 1698-1706
Copyright: © Song et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

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.

View Figures

View References

1	Rahal RM, de Freitas-Júnior R, da Cunha L Carlos, Moreira MA, Rosa VD and Conde DM: Mammary duct ectasia: An overview. Breast J. 17:694–695. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Kim BS, Lee JH, Kim WJ, Kim DC, Shin S, Kwon HJ, Park JS and Park YM: Periductal mastitis mimicking breast cancer in a male breast. Clin Imaging. 37:574–576. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Duchesne N, Skolnik S and Bilmer S: Ultrasound appearance of chronic mammary duct ectasia. Can Assoc Radiol J. 56:297–300. 2005.PubMed/NCBI
4	Masciadri N and Ferranti C: Benign breast lesions: Ultrasound. J Ultrasound. 14:55–65. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Yamauchi H, Woodward WA, Valero V, Alvarez RH, Lucci A, Buchholz TA, Iwamoto T, Krishnamurthy S, Yang W, Reuben JM, et al: Inflammatory breast cancer: What we know and what we need to learn. Oncologist. 17:891–899. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Alhabshi SM, Rahmat K, Halim N Abdul, Aziz S, Radhika S, Gan GC, Vijayananthan A, Westerhout CJ, Mohd-Shah MN, Jaszle S, et al: Semi-quantitative and qualitative assessment of breast ultrasound elastography in differentiating between malignant and benign lesions. Ultrasound Med Biol. 39:568–578. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Suppiah S, Rahmat K, Rozalli FI and Azlan CA: Re: Improved diagnostic accuracy in differentiating malignant and benign lesions using single-voxel proton MRS of the breast at 3 T MRI. A reply. Clin Radiol. 69:e110–e111. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Min Q, Shao K, Zhai L, Liu W, Zhu C, Yuan L and Yang J: Differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast masses using diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. World J Surg Oncol. 13:322015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Zhang F, Yu D, Guo M, Wang Q, Yu Z, Zhou F, Zhao M, Xue F and Shao G: Ultrasound elastography and magnetic resonance examinations are effective for the accurate diagnosis of mammary duct ectasia. Int J Clin Exp Med. 8:8506–8515. 2015.PubMed/NCBI
10	Hsu HH, Yu JC, Hsu GC, Chang WC, Yu CP, Tung HJ, Tzao C and Huang GS: Ultrasonographic alterations associated with the dilatation of mammary ducts: Feature analysis and BI-RADS assessment. Eur Radiol. 20:293–302. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Itoh A, Ueno E, Tohno E, Kamma H, Takahashi H, Shiina T, Yamakawa M and Matsumura T: Breast disease: Clinical application of US elastography for diagnosis. Radiology. 239:341–350. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Goddi A, Bonardi M and Alessi S: Breast elastography: A literature review. J Ultrasound. 15:192–198. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Radiology ACo, . Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). 4th. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2003
14	El Khouli RH, Macura KJ, Jacobs MA, Khalil TH, Kamel IR, Dwyer A and Bluemke DA: Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: Quantitative method for kinetic curve type assessment. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 193:W295–W300. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Howell A, Anderson AS, Clarke RB, Duffy SW, Evans DG, Garcia-Closas M, Gescher AJ, Key TJ, Saxton JM and Harvie MN: Risk determination and prevention of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 16:4462014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Holley SO, Appleton CM, Farria DM, Reichert VC, Warrick J, Allred DC and Monsees BS: Pathologic outcomes of nonmalignant papillary breast lesions diagnosed at imaging-guided core needle biopsy. Radiology. 265:379–384. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Cheng J, Ding HY and DU YT: Granulomatous lobular mastitis associated with mammary duct ectasia: A clinicopathologic study of 32 cases with review of literature. Zhonghua Bing Li Xue Za Zhi. 42:665–668. 2013.(In Chinese). PubMed/NCBI
18	Jemal A, Ward E and Thun MJ: Recent trends in breast cancer incidence rates by age and tumor characteristics among U.S. women. Breast Cancer Res. 9:R282007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Labib NA, Ghobashi MM, Moneer MM, Helal MH and Abdalgaleel SA: Evaluation of BreastLight as a tool for early detection of breast lesions among females attending national cancer institute, Cairo University. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 14:4647–4650. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Yabuuchi H, Matsuo Y, Okafuji T, Kamitani T, Soeda H, Setoguchi T, Sakai S, Hatakenaka M, Kubo M, Sadanaga N, et al: Enhanced mass on contrast-enhanced breast MR imaging: Lesion characterization using combination of dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR images. J Magn Reson Imaging. 28:1157–1165. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Li B, Zhao X, Dai SC and Cheng W: Associations between mammography and ultrasound imaging features and molecular characteristics of triple-negative breast cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 15:3555–3559. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Zeng H, Zhao YL, Huang Y, Lin X, Chen XY and Li AH: Values of color doppler flow imaging and imaging changes of breast fascia and ligament in differential diagnosis of small breast neoplasms. Ai Zheng. 25:339–342. 2006.(In Chinese). PubMed/NCBI
23	Yang M, Liu F, Gu XN, Cai YL, Wang YY and Zhou WJ: The application value of BI-RADS lexicon and high-frequency CDFI scoring in differentiation of benign from malignant lesions of the breast. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 93:1833–1835. 2013.(In Chinese). PubMed/NCBI
24	Stanzani D, Chala LF, Barros Nd, Cerri GG and Chammas MC: Can Doppler or contrast-enhanced ultrasound analysis add diagnostically important information about the nature of breast lesions? Clinics (Sao Paulo). 69:87–92. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	del Cura JL, Elizagaray E, Zabala R, Legórburu A and Grande D: The use of unenhanced Doppler sonography in the evaluation of solid breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 184:1788–1794. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	Gong X, Wang Y and Xu P: Application of real-time ultrasound elastography for differential diagnosis of breast tumors. J Ultrasound Med. 32:2171–2176. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27	Fischer T, Sack I and Thomas A: Characterization of focal breast lesions by means of elastography. Rofo. 185:816–823. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	Hassan HHM, Zahran MHM, Hassan HEP, Abdel-Hamid AEM and Fadaly GAS: Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging of breast lesions: Initial experience at Alexandria University. Alex J Med. 49:265–272. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar
29	Cho N, Jang M, Lyou CY, Park JS, Choi HY and Moon WK: Distinguishing benign from malignant masses at breast US: Combined US elastography and color doppler US-influence on radiologist accuracy. Radiology. 262:80–90. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
30	Caivano R, Villonio A, D' Antuono F, Gioioso M, Rabasco P, Iannelli G, Zandolino A, Lotumolo A, Dinardo G, Macarini L, et al: Diffusion weighted imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient in 3 tesla magnetic resonance imaging of breast lesions. Cancer Invest. 33:159–164. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
31	Luo Y, Yu J, Chen D, Xu Z and Zeng H: The actions of diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic contrast enhanced MRI in differentiating breast tumors. Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi. 30:1219–1223. 2013.(In Chinese). PubMed/NCBI
32	Yeh ED, Slanetz PJ, Edmister WB, Talele A, Monticciolo D and Kopans DB: Invasive lobular carcinoma: Spectrum of enhancement and morphology on magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J. 9:13–18. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
33	Yuan HM, Yu JQ, Chu ZG and Peng LQ: Distinguishing benign and malignant lesions with time-signal intensity curve of dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI scanning. Sichuan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 42:556–559. 2011.(In Chinese). PubMed/NCBI
34	Fernández-Guinea O, Andicoechea A, González LO, González-Reyes S, Merino AM, Hernández LC, López-Muñiz A, García-Pravia P and Vizoso FJ: Relationship between morphological features and kinetic patterns of enhancement of the dynamic breast magnetic resonance imaging and clinico-pathological and biological factors in invasive breast cancer. BMC Cancer. 10:82010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
35	Brookes MJ and Bourke AG: Radiological appearances of papillary breast lesions. Clin Radiol. 63:1265–1273. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
36	Zhu Y, Zhang S, Liu P, Lu H, Xu Y and Yang WT: Solitary intraductal papillomas of the breast: MRI features and differentiation from small invasive ductal carcinomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 199:936–942. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
37	Woodhams R, Matsunaga K, Kan S, Hata H, Ozaki M, Iwabuchi K, Kuranami M, Watanabe M and Hayakawa K: ADC mapping of benign and malignant breast tumors. Magn Reson Med Sci. 4:35–42. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI