Abstract:PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to investigate the independent risk factors and associated predictive values of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), shear wave elastography (SWE), and strain elastography (SE) for high-risk lesions (HRL) and malignant tumors (MT) among nonpalpable breast masses classified as BI-RADS category 4 on conventional ultrasound.METHODS: This prospective study involved consecutively admitted patients with breast tumors from January 2018, aiming to explore the management of BI-RADS category 4 breast tumors using CEUS and elastography. We conducted a retrospective review of patient data, focusing on those with a history of a nonpalpable mass as the primary complaint. Pathologic findings after surgical resection served as the gold standard. The CEUS arterial-phase indices were analyzed using contrast agent arrival-time parametric imaging processing mode, while quantitative and qualitative indices were examined on ES images. Independent risk factors were identified through binary logistic regression multifactorial analysis. The predictive efficacy of different modalities was compared using a receiver operating characteristics curve. Subsequently, a nomogram for predicting the risk of HRL/MT was established based on a multifactorial logistic regression model.RESULTS: A total of 146 breast masses from 146 patients were included, comprising 80 benign tumors, 12 HRLs, and 54 MTs based on the final pathology. There was no significant difference in pathologic size between the benign and HRL/MT groups [8.00(6.25,10.00) vs. 9.00(6.00,10.00), P = 0.506]. The diagnostic efficacy of US plus CEUS exceeded that of US plus SWE/SE for BI-RADS 4 nonpalpable masses, with an AUC of 0.954 compared to 0.798/0.741 (P < 0.001). Further stratified analysis revealed a more pronounced improvement for reclassification of BI-RADS 4a masses (AUC: 0.943 vs. 0.762/0.675, P < 0.001) than BI-RADS 4b (AUC:0.950 vs. 0.885/0.796, P>0.05) with the assistance of CEUS than SWE/SE. Employing downgrade CEUS strategies resulted in negative predictive values ranging from 95.2 % to 100.0 % for BI-RADS 4a and 4b masses. Conversely, using upgrade nomogram strategies, which included the independent predictive risk factors of irregular enhanced shape, poor defined enhanced margin, earlier enhanced time, increased surrounding vessels, and presence of contrast agent retention, the diagnostic performance achieved an AUC of 0.947 with good calibration.CONCLUSION: After investigating the potential of CEUS and ES in improving risk assessment and diagnostic accuracy for nonpalpable BI-RADS category 4 breast masses, it is evident that CEUS has a more significant impact on enhancing classification compared to ES, particularly for BI-RADS 4a subgroup masses. This finding suggests that CEUS may offer greater benefits in improving risk assessment and diagnostic accuracy for this specific subgroup of breast masses.

A Modified CEUS Risk Stratification Model for Adnexal Masses with Solid Components: Prospective Multicenter Study and Risk Adjustment

Integrating Contrast-enhanced US to O-RADS US for Classification of Adnexal Lesions with Solid Components: Time-intensity Curve Analysis versus Visual Assessment

A Diagnostic Model for Breast Lesions with Enlarged Enhancement Extent on Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Improves Malignancy Prediction

Value of Scoring by Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Combined with Ultrasonic Elastography in Differential Diagnosis of BI-RADS 4 Lesions

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound combined with Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System US risk stratification and management system for diagnosis of adnexal masses

Differentiating Benign From Malignant Ovarian Masses With Solid Components: Diagnostic Performance of CEUS Combined With IOTA Simple Rules and O-RADS

The Contribution Of Qualitative Ceus To The Determination Of Malignancy In Adnexal Masses, Indeterminate On Conventional Us - A Multicenter Study

Diagnostic Value of Contrast‐Enhanced Ultrasound in Benign and Malignant Adnexal Masses

Adnexal masses: Diagnostic performance of contrast‐enhanced ultrasound using the simple rules from the International Ovarian Tumor Analysis group

Comparison of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound, IOTA Simple Rules and O-RADS for Assessing the Malignant Risk of Sonographically Appearing Solid Ovarian Masses.

Validation of American College of Radiology Ovarian-Adnexal Reporting and Data System Ultrasound (O-RADS US): Analysis on 1054 Adnexal Masses

Comparative Study of the Efficacy of the Ovarian-Adnexa Reporting and Data System Ultrasound Combined with Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and the ADNEX MR Scoring System in the Diagnosis of Adnexal Masses.

Combination of conventional ultrasound with quantitative and qualitative analyses of CEUS for the differentiation of benign and malignant breast solid lesions: A modified breast cancer model

Diagnostic Performance of a Modified O-RADS Classification System for Adnexal Lesions Incorporating Clinical Features

Contrast-enhanced US to Improve Diagnostic Performance of O-RADS US Risk Stratification System for Malignancy

A Prospective Multicenter Study on the Additive Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound for Biopsy Decision of Ultrasound BI-RADS 4 Breast Lesions

Comparative Diagnostic Evaluation with Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound, Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients with Pancreatic Cystic Neoplasms

Predictive value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography and ultrasound elastography for management of BI-RADS category 4 nonpalpable breast masses

Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrasound Classifications – O-RADS US V2022, O-RADS US V2020, and IOTA SR – in Distinguishing Benign and Malignant Adnexal Masses: Enhanced by Combining O-RADS US V2022 with Tumor Marker HE4

The Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in Differentiating Testicular Masses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Predictive Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Combined with Conventional Ultrasound in Solid Renal Parenchymal Lesions.