Eichler Christian, Abrar Sharareh, Puppe Julian, Arndt Mariam, Ohlinger Ralf, Hahn Markus, Warm Mathias
Breast Center, Municipal Hospital Holweide, Cologne, Germany
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Municipal Hospital Holweide, Cologne, Germany.
Anticancer Res. 2017 Sep;37(9):5065-5070. doi: 10.21873/anticanres.11923.
Retrospective analysis of breast cancer imaging methods is a common tool for evaluating the effectiveness of ultrasound and mammography regarding ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). No large number subpopulation of pure DCIS has been reported. It is however known that mammography and ultrasound underestimate tumor dimension with increasing tumor size. We aimed to quantify this discrepancy.
This retrospective analysis reviewed the ultrasound and mammography data from 173 patients with DCIS at the University of Cologne - Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics between the years 2007 and 2010. Of these 173 patients, 34 fulfilled the DCIS analysis requirements and were evaluated in this study.
Overall, ultrasound underestimated tumor size 79.4% of the time, while overestimating only 20.6% of the time. Mammography underestimated tumor size in 50%, overestimated in 38.2%, correctly estimating in 11.8%. Over and underestimation distributions differed drastically above and a cut-off point of ≤2 cm actual tumor size, with a significant shift toward severe underestimation by both methods above a tumor size of 2 cm. DCIS misestimation was defined as the absolute value of the difference between actual tumor size and pre-surgical measurement by an imaging method. Mean DCIS size misestimation (actual tumor size ≤2 cm) was 3 mm for ultrasound and 6.2 mm for mammography.
We support previous findings that ultrasound and mammography lose accuracy with increasing tumor size. Nonetheless, ultrasound may be more useful in estimation of DCIS size for tumors ≤2 cm than previously expected.
对乳腺癌成像方法进行回顾性分析是评估超声和乳腺X线摄影对导管原位癌(DCIS)有效性的常用手段。尚未有大量关于纯DCIS亚群的报道。然而,已知乳腺X线摄影和超声会随着肿瘤尺寸增大而低估肿瘤大小。我们旨在量化这种差异。
这项回顾性分析回顾了2007年至2010年间科隆大学妇产科173例DCIS患者的超声和乳腺X线摄影数据。在这173例患者中,34例符合DCIS分析要求并在本研究中进行评估。
总体而言,超声在79.4%的情况下低估肿瘤大小,而高估仅占20.6%的时间。乳腺X线摄影低估肿瘤大小的占50%,高估的占38.2%,正确估计的占11.8%。在实际肿瘤大小≤2 cm的临界点以上,高估和低估分布差异极大,两种方法在肿瘤大小超过2 cm时均显著转向严重低估。DCIS错误估计定义为实际肿瘤大小与术前成像方法测量值之间差异的绝对值。对于实际肿瘤大小≤2 cm的情况,超声的平均DCIS大小错误估计为3 mm,乳腺X线摄影为6.2 mm。
我们支持先前的研究结果,即超声和乳腺X线摄影会随着肿瘤大小增加而失去准确性。尽管如此,对于≤2 cm的肿瘤,超声在估计DCIS大小方面可能比先前预期的更有用。