Value of multimodal imaging in the diagnosis of breast sclerosing adenosis associated with malignant lesions
Authors: Chen Haiping , Bao Lingyun , Yu Lifang , Sun Hong , Tan Yanjuan , Wei Peiying , Zheng Zhelan 
Published: October 2022

Aim

To explore the diagnostic value of multimodal imaging techniques, including automatic breast volume scanner (ABVS), mammography (MG), and magnetic resonance (MRI) in breast sclerosing adenosis (SA) associated with malignant lesions.

Methods

From January 2018 to October 2020, 76 patients (88 lesions) with pathologically confirmed as SA associated with malignant or benign lesions were retrospective analyzed. All patients completed ABVS examination, 58 patients (67 lesions) with MG and 50 patients (62 lesions) with MRI were also completed before biopsy or surgical excision, of which, six patients (eight lesions) diagnosed as Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI‐RADS) category 3 by all imaging examinations underwent surgical excision without biopsy, other 70 patients (80 lesions) with BI‐RADS category 4 or above by any imaging examination completed biopsy, including 65 patients (75 lesions) were further surgical excised and the other five patients (five lesions) were just followed up. All lesions were retrospectively described and classified, and were divided into benign group and malignant group according to their pathological results. Image features of different examination methods between the two groups were compared and analyzed. A ROC curve was established using the sensitivity of BI‐RADS categories to predict malignant lesions in different imaging techniques as the ordinate and 1‐specificity as the abscissa.

Results

88 lesions including 26 purely SA and 45 SA associated with benign lesions were classified as benign group, and the remaining 17 SA associated with malignant lesions were classified as malignant group. On ABVS, 40 mass lesions, their heterogeneous echo, not circumscribed margin and coronal convergence signs were statistically significant for malignant lesions (p < .05), but the remain 48 nonmass lesions lack specific sonographic features. On MG, 12 showed negative results, 55 showed with microcalcification, mass, structural distortion, and asymmetric density shadow, of which 11 lesions had the above two signs at the same time, but only microcalcification had statistical difference between the two groups. 35 mass enhanced lesions and 27 nonmass enhanced lesions on MRI, but there were no significant difference between their pathological results. Time signal intensity curves showed no differences, but ADC value <1.10 × 10−3 mm2/s is more significant in malignant lesions (p < .05). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of BI‐RADS classification of ABVS, MG, and MRI in the diagnosis of malignant lesions were 0.611, 0.474, and 0.751, respectively, and the AUC of the combined diagnosis of the three was 0.761.

Conclusion

Mass lesions with heterogeneous echo, not circumscribed margin and coronal convergence sign on ABVS, microcalcification on MG and the ADC value <1.10 × 10−3 mm2/s on MRI are significant signs for SA associated with malignant lesions. The combined diagnosis of the three methods was the highest, and the following were MRI, ABVS, and MG. Therefore, be cognizant of significant characteristics in SA associated with malignancy showed in different imaging examinations can improve the preoperative evaluation of SA and better provide basis for subsequent clinical decision‐making.