Second-Look-Ultraschall mittels Scherwellen-Elastografie bei Verdacht auf lokoregionales Rezidiv des Mammakarzinoms im MRT

Zusammenfassung

Ziel Es soll untersucht werden, ob der Second-Look-US mittels Scherwellen-Elastografie (SWE) nützlich ist, um zwischen benignen und malignen Veränderungen in der postoperativen Brust nach der operativen Therapie des Mammakarzinoms zu differenzieren.

Material und Methoden SWE und die damit verbundenen sonografischen Merkmale wurden bei 90 Patientinnen mit Anamnese einer operativen Therapie des Mammakarzinoms und einer bei der MRT-Nachuntersuchung entdeckten verdächtigen Läsion überprüft. Ein einziger erfahrener Radiologe führte alle Second-Look-US-Untersuchungen mit SWE-Messungen durch, indem er eine kreisförmige Region of Interest von 2 mm Durchmesser über dem steifsten Teil der Läsion legte. Gewebeproben für die histopathologische Untersuchung wurden dabei durch Stanzbiopsie entnommen.

Ergebnisse Von 90 Läsionen erwiesen sich 39 als maligne in der histopathologischen Untersuchung. Von den malignen Läsionen zeigten 50 % El_max-Werte im Bereich von 128 bis 199 kPa, und 50 % der benignen Läsionen hatten El_max-Werte von 65 bis 169 kPa. Ein Cut-off-Wert von 171,2 kPa für El_max zeigt eine Sensitivität von 59 % und eine Spezifität von 78,4 % für das Karzinomrezidiv und eine AUC von 0,706 (95 %-KI 0,6–0,81; p = 0,001). In univariaten logistischen Modellen erwiesen sich eingeschränkte Diffusion und Steifigkeit bei SWE, El_max > 171,2 kPa, als signifikante Rezidiv-Prädiktoren. Im multivariaten Modell bleibt die eingeschränkte Diffusion ein signifikanter unabhängiger Rezidiv-Prädiktor. Bei einer Rezidiv-Prävalenz von 43 % liegt die Testsensitivität bei 95 % (95 %-KI 81–99 %) und die Spezifität bei 75 % (95 %-KI 60–85 %).

Schlussfolgerung Steifere Läsionen in der postoperativen Brust sollten im Second-Look-Ultraschall als suspekt angesehen werden. SWE kann eine hilfreiche Methode zur Identifizierung maligner Läsionen sein, insbesondere im Zusammenhang mit einer eingeschränkten Diffusion in der MRTUntersuchung. Die Steifigkeit der Läsion sollte jedoch nicht als unabhängiger Prädiktor für die Läsionsmalignität in der postoperativen Brust angesehen werden, da in der SWE benigne Veränderungen steif, Karzinomrezidive hingegen weich erscheinen können.

Abstract

Purpose To investigate if second-look US using shear-wave elastography (SWE) can help to differentiate between benign and malignant changes in the postoperative breast after surgical treatment of breast carcinoma.

Materials and Methods SWE and related sonographic features were reviewed in 90 female patients with a history of surgical treatment of breast carcinoma and a suspicious lesion detected on a follow-up MRI scan. A single experienced radiologist performed all second-look US exams with SWE measurements placing a circular region of interest measuring 2 mm in diameter over the stiffest part of the lesion. Tissue samples for histopathological analysis were obtained during the same US examination via core-needle biopsy.

Results Out of 90 lesions, 39 were proven malignant on histopathological analysis. 50 % of malignant lesions had El_max values ranging from 128 to 199 kPa, and 50 % of benign lesions had El_max values ranging from 65 to 169 kPa. The cutoff value of 171.2 kPa for El_max shows a sensitivity of 59 % and specificity of 78.4 % for carcinoma recurrence, area under the curve 0.706 (CI95 % 0.6–0.81), P = 0.001. In univariate logistic models, restricted diffusion and stiffness on SWE, El_max > 171.2 kPa, were shown as significant recurrence predictors. In the multivariate model, restricted diffusion remains significant independent recurrence predictor. With a recurrence prevalence of 43 %, the test sensitivity is 95 % (CI95 % 81–99 %) and the specificity is 75 % (CI95 % 60–85 %).

Conclusion Stiffer lesions should be considered suspicious on second-look US in the postoperative breast and SWE can be a helpful tool in identifying malignant lesions, especially if this is related to restricted diffusion on MRI exam. Lesion stiffness, however, should not be considered as an independent predictor of lesion malignancy in the postoperative breast, because of benign changes that can appear stiff on SWE, as well as carcinoma recurrences that may appear soft.

Key words

mamma - sonoelastografie - karzinom - rezidiv

Publication History

Received: 22 November 2019

Accepted: 04 May 2020

Article published online:
26 September 2022

• Literatur

• 1 Mamounas EP, Tang G, Liu Q. The importance of systemic therapy in minimizing local recurrence after breast-conserving surgery: the NSABP experience. J Surg Oncol 2014; 110: 45-50
• 2 Frandsen J, Ly D, Cannon G. et al. In the Modern Treatment Era, Is Breast Conservation Equivalent to Mastectomy in Women Younger Than 40 Years of Age? A Multi-Institution Study. Int J Radiat Oncol 2015; 93: 1096-1103
• 3 Darby S, McGale P. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). et al. Effect of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery on 10-year recurrence and 15-year breast cancer death: meta-analysis of individual patient data for 10801 women in 17 randomised trials. Lancet (London, England) 2011; 378: 1707-1716
• 4 Wadasadawala T, Vadgaonkar R, Bajpai J. Management of Isolated Locoregional Recurrences in Breast Cancer: A Review of Local and Systemic Modalities. Clin Breast Cancer 2017; 17: 493-502
• 5 Clarke M, Collins R, Darby S. et al. Effects of radiotherapy and of differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 2005; 366: 2087-2106
• 6 Montgomery DA, Krupa K, Cooke TG. Locoregional Relapse After Breast Cancer: Most Relapses Occur Late and are not Clinically Detected. Breast J 2009; 15: 163-167
• 7 Montgomery DA, Krupa K, Cooke TG. Follow-up in breast cancer: does routine clinical examination improve outcome? A systematic review of the literature. Br J Cancer 2007; 97: 1632-1641
• 8 Gutierrez R, Horst KC, Dirbas FM. et al Breast Imaging Following Breast Conservation Therapy. In: Breast Surgical Techniques and Interdisciplinary Management. New York, NY: Springer New York; 2010. [cited 2019 Jun 20] 975-995
• 9 Khatcheressian JL, Hurley P, Bantug E. et al. Breast cancer follow-up and management after primary treatment: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31: 961-965
• 10 Emens LA, Davidson NE. The follow-up of breast cancer. Semin Oncol 2003; 30: 338-348
• 11 Sardanelli F, Boetes C, Borisch B. et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: Recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer 2010; 46: 1296-1316
• 12 Clauser P, Mann R, Athanasiou A. et al. A survey by the European Society of Breast Imaging on the utilisation of breast MRI in clinical practice. Eur Radiol 2018; 28: 1909-1918
• 13 Lehman CD, Lee JM, DeMartini WB. et al. Screening MRI in Women With a Personal History of Breast Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2016; 108: djv349
• 14 Gigli S, Amabile MI, Di Pastena F. et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging after Breast Oncoplastic Surgery: An Update. Breast Care 2017; 12: 260-265
• 15 Kuhl C. The Current Status of Breast MR Imaging Part I. Choice of Technique, Image Interpretation, Diagnostic Accuracy, and Transfer to Clinical Practice. Radiology 2007; 244: 356-378
• 16 Spick C, Baltzer PAT. Diagnostic Utility of Second-Look US for Breast Lesions Identified at MR Imaging: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Radiology 2014; 273: 401-409
• 17 Berg WA, Cosgrove DO, Doré CJ. et al. Shear-wave Elastography Improves the Specificity of Breast US: The BE1 Multinational Study of 939 Masses. Radiology 2012; 262: 435-449
• 18 Brkljačić B, Ivanac G. Ultrasonography of the Breast. Ultrasound Clin 2014; 9: 391-427
• 19 Jales RM, Dória MT, Serra KP. et al. Power Doppler Ultrasonography and Shear Wave Elastography as Complementary Imaging Methods for Suspected Local Breast Cancer Recurrence. J Ultrasound Med 2018; 37: 1493-1501
• 20 Lee SH, Chang JM, Kim WH. et al. Differentiation of benign from malignant solid breast masses: comparison of two-dimensional and threedimensional shear-wave elastography. Eur Radiol 2013; 23: 1015-1026
• 21 Cebi Olgun D, Korkmazer B, Kilic F. et al. Use of shear wave elastography to differentiate benign and malignant breast lesions. Diagnostic Interv Radiol 2014; 20: 239-244
• 22 Chen L, He J, Liu G. et al. Diagnostic performances of shear-wave elastography for identification of malignant breast lesions: a meta-analysis. Jpn J Radiol 2014; 32: 592-599
• 23 Youk JH, Gweon HM, Son EJ. Shear-wave elastography in breast ultrasonography: The state of the art. Ultrasonography 2017; 36: 300-309
• 24 Youk JH, Gweon HM, Son EJ. et al. Diagnostic value of commercially available shear-wave elastography for breast cancers: integration into BI-RADS classification with subcategories of category 4. Eur Radiol 2013; 23: 2695-2704
• 25 Au FWF, Ghai S, Moshonov H. et al. Diagnostic performance of quantitative shear wave elastography in the evaluation of solid breast masses: Determination of the most discriminatory parameter. Am J Roentgenol 2014; 202: E328-E336
• 26 Tian J, Liu Q, Wang X. et al. Application of 3D and 2D quantitative shear wave elastography (SWE) to differentiate between benign and malignant breast masses. Sci Rep 2017; 7: 41216
• 27 Song EJ, Sohn YM, Seo M. Tumor stiffness measured by quantitative and qualitative shear wave elastography of breast cancer. Br J Radiol 2018; 91: 20170830
• 28 Berg WA, Mendelson EB, Cosgrove DO. et al. Quantitative Maximum Shear-Wave Stiffness of Breast Masses as a Predictor of Histopathologic Severity. Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205: 448-455
• 29 Au FWF, Ghai S, Lu FI. et al. Quantitative Shear Wave Elastography. Acad Radiol 2015; 22: 269-277
• 30 Margolis NE, Morley C, Lotfi P. et al. Update on imaging of the postsurgical breast. Radiographics 2014; 34: 642-660
• 31 Partridge SC, Amornsiripanitch N. DWI in the Assessment of Breast Lesions. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2017; 26: 201-209
• 32 Spick C, Bickel H, Pinker K. et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI of breast lesions: a prospective clinical investigation of the quantitative imaging biomarker characteristics of reproducibility, repeatability, and diagnostic accuracy. NMR Biomed 2016; 29: 1445-1453
• 33 Radovic N, Ivanac G, Divjak E. et al. Evaluation of Breast Cancer Morphology Using Diffusion-Weighted and Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MRI: Intermethod and Interobserver Agreement. J Magn Reson Imaging 2019; 49: 1381-1390