TY - JOUR
T1 - Sonographic Evaluation of Breast Nodules
T2 - Comparison of Conventional, Real-Time Compound, and Pulse-Inversion Harmonic Images
AU - Seo, Bo Kyoung
AU - Oh, Yu Whan
AU - Kim, Hyung Rae
AU - Kim, Hong Weon
AU - Kang, Chang Ho
AU - Lee, Nam Joon
AU - Kim, Jung Hyuk
AU - Park, Bum Jin
AU - Cho, Kyu Ran
AU - Lee, June Young
AU - Lee, Ki Yeoul
AU - Bae, Jeoung Won
PY - 2002
Y1 - 2002
N2 - Objective: To compare the use of conventional, real-time compound, and pulse-inversion harmonic imaging in the evaluation of breast nodules. Materials and Methods: Fifty-two breast nodules were included in this study, conducted between May and December 2000, in which conventional, real-time compound, and pulse-inversion harmonic images were obtained in the same plane. Three radiologists, each blinded to the interpretations of the other two, evaluated the findings, characterizing the lesions and ranking the three techniques from grade 1, the worst, to grade 3, the best. Lesion conspicuity was assessed, and lesions were also characterized in terms of their margin, clarity of internal echotexture, and clarity of posterior echo pattern. The three techniques were compared using Friedman's test, and interobserver agreement in image interpretation was assessed by means of the intraclass correlation coefficient. Results: With regard to lesion conspicuity, margin, and internal echotexture of the nodules, real-time compound imaging was the best technique (p<0.05); in terms of posterior echo pattern, the best was pulse-inversion harmonic imaging (p<0.05). Real-time compound and pulse inversion harmonic imaging were better than conventional sonography in all evaluative aspects. Interobserver agreement was greater than moderate. Conclusion: Real-time compound and pulse-inversion harmonic imaging procedures are superior to conventional sonography in terms of both lesion conspicuity and the further characterization of breast nodules. Real-time compound imaging is the best technique for evaluation of the margin and internal echotexture of nodules, while pulse-inversion harmonic imaging is very effective for the evaluation of the posterior echo patterns.
AB - Objective: To compare the use of conventional, real-time compound, and pulse-inversion harmonic imaging in the evaluation of breast nodules. Materials and Methods: Fifty-two breast nodules were included in this study, conducted between May and December 2000, in which conventional, real-time compound, and pulse-inversion harmonic images were obtained in the same plane. Three radiologists, each blinded to the interpretations of the other two, evaluated the findings, characterizing the lesions and ranking the three techniques from grade 1, the worst, to grade 3, the best. Lesion conspicuity was assessed, and lesions were also characterized in terms of their margin, clarity of internal echotexture, and clarity of posterior echo pattern. The three techniques were compared using Friedman's test, and interobserver agreement in image interpretation was assessed by means of the intraclass correlation coefficient. Results: With regard to lesion conspicuity, margin, and internal echotexture of the nodules, real-time compound imaging was the best technique (p<0.05); in terms of posterior echo pattern, the best was pulse-inversion harmonic imaging (p<0.05). Real-time compound and pulse inversion harmonic imaging were better than conventional sonography in all evaluative aspects. Interobserver agreement was greater than moderate. Conclusion: Real-time compound and pulse-inversion harmonic imaging procedures are superior to conventional sonography in terms of both lesion conspicuity and the further characterization of breast nodules. Real-time compound imaging is the best technique for evaluation of the margin and internal echotexture of nodules, while pulse-inversion harmonic imaging is very effective for the evaluation of the posterior echo patterns.
KW - Breast, US
KW - Ultrasound (US)
KW - Ultrasound (US), comparative studies
KW - Ultrasound (US), technology
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036372790&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3348/kjr.2002.3.1.38
DO - 10.3348/kjr.2002.3.1.38
M3 - Article
C2 - 11919477
AN - SCOPUS:0036372790
SN - 1229-6929
VL - 3
SP - 38
EP - 44
JO - Korean journal of radiology
JF - Korean journal of radiology
IS - 1
ER -