Best Practice Guideline - DEGUM Recommendations on Breast Ultrasound. / Best Practice Guideline ­ Empfehlungen der DEGUM zur Durchführung und Beurteilung der Mammasonografie ­ TEIL I ­ Untersuchungstechnik, Ultraschall-DEGUM-Kriterien und deren Dokumentation.

For many years, breast ultrasound has been used in addition to mammography as an important method for clarifying breast findings. However, differences in the interpretation of findings continue to be problematic 1 2. These differences decrease the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound after detection of a finding and complicate interdisciplinary communication and the comparison of scientific studies 3. In 1999, the American College of Radiology (ACR) created a working group (International Expert Working Group) that developed a classification system for ultrasound examinations based on the established BI-RADS classification of mammographic findings under consideration of literature data 4. Due to differences in content, the German Society for Ultrasound in Medicine (DEGUM) published its own BI-RADS-analogue criteria catalog in 2006 3. In addition to the persistence of differences in content, there is also an issue with formal licensing with the current 5th edition of the ACR BI-RADS catalog, even though the content is recognized by the DEGUM as another system for describing and documenting findings. The goal of the Best Practice Guideline of the Breast Ultrasound Working Group of the DEGUM is to provide colleagues specialized in senology with a current catalog of ultrasound criteria and assessment categories as well as best practice recommendations for the various ultrasound modalities.

Shear-wave elastography improves the specificity of breast US: the BE1 multinational study of 939 masses.

PURPOSE: To determine whether adding shear-wave (SW) elastographic features could improve accuracy of ultrasonographic (US) assessment of breast masses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From September 2008 to September 2010, 958 women consented to repeat standard breast US supplemented by quantitative SW elastographic examination in this prospective multicenter institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant protocol. B-mode Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) features and assessments were recorded. SW elastographic evaluation (mean, maximum, and minimum elasticity of stiffest portion of mass and surrounding tissue; lesion-to-fat elasticity ratio; ratio of SW elastographic-to-B-mode lesion diameter or area; SW elastographic lesion shape and homogeneity) was performed. Qualitative color SW elastographic stiffness was assessed independently. Nine hundred thirty-nine masses were analyzable; 102 BI-RADS category 2 masses were assumed to be benign; reference standard was available for 837 category 3 or higher lesions. Considering BI-RADS category 4a or higher as test positive for malignancy, effect of SW elastographic features on area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity after reclassifying category 3 and 4a masses was determined. RESULTS: Median participant age was 50 years; 289 of 939 (30.8%) masses were malignant (median mass size, 12 mm). B-mode BI-RADS AUC was 0.950; eight of 303 (2.6%) BI-RADS category 3 masses, 18 of 193 (9.3%) category 4a lesions, 41 of 97 (42%) category 4b lesions, 42 of 57 (74%) category 4c lesions, and 180 of 187 (96.3%) category 5 lesions were malignant. By using visual color stiffness to selectively upgrade category 3 and lack of stiffness to downgrade category 4a masses, specificity improved from 61.1% (397 of 650) to 78.5% (510 of 650) (P<.001); AUC increased to 0.962 (P=.005). Oval shape on SW elastographic images and quantitative maximum elasticity of 80 kPa (5.2 m/sec) or less improved specificity (69.4% [451 of 650] and 77.4% [503 of 650], P<.001 for both), without significant improvement in sensitivity or AUC. CONCLUSION: Adding SW elastographic features to BI-RADS feature analysis improved specificity of breast US mass assessment without loss of sensitivity.

Comparison of 1.0 M gadobutrol and 0.5 M gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in five hundred seventy-two patients with known or suspected liver lesions: results of a multicenter, double-blind, interindividual, randomized clinical phase-III trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy (accuracy, sensitivity, specificity) of 1.0 M gadobutrol versus 0.5 M gadopentetate for the classification of lesions as either benign or malignant in patients with known or suspected liver lesions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A multicenter, phase-III, randomized, interindividually controlled comparison study with blinded reader evaluation was performed to investigate the diagnostic efficacy of a bolus injection of 1.0 M gadobutrol compared with 0.5 M gadopentetate at a dose of 0.1 mmol Gd/kg BW. The imaging protocol included a dynamic 3D-evaluation, static conventional, and fat saturated T1-weighted sequences. MR datasets were evaluated by 3 independent radiologists. The standard of reference was defined by an independent truth panel (radiologist or hepatologist). The safety evaluation included adverse events, vital signs, and physical examination. RESULTS: A total of 497 of 572 patients were eligible for the final efficacy analysis. Noninferiority of gadobutrol-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the classification of liver lesions was demonstrated on the basis of diagnostic accuracy determined by the on-site investigators (-0.098, 0.021) as well as for the average reader of the blinded evaluation (-0.096, 0.014) (95% confidence interval), compared with the predefined standard of reference. Very similar increases in sensitivity (ranging from approximately 10% to approximately 55%) and specificity (ranging from approximately 1% to approximately 18%) compared with precontrast MRI were also observed for the 2 contrast agent groups, with maximum differences of 4%.Very similar, low rates of adverse events were recorded for each of the 2 groups. No clinically relevant changes in vital signs or the results of the physical examination were observed in any patient. CONCLUSION: This study documents evidence for the noninferiority of a single i.v. bolus injection of 1.0 M gadobutrol (0.1 mmol/kg body weight) to 0.5 M gadopentetate (0.1 mmol/kg body weight) in the diagnostic assessment of liver lesions with contrast-enhanced MRI. The known excellent safety profile of gadobutrol was confirmed in this clinical trial and is similar to that of gadopentetate.

Characterization of a new double-injury restenosis model in the rat aorta.

PURPOSE: To characterize a new rat model of restenosis for evaluation of local or systemic drug strategies. METHODS: Arterial lesions were induced by placement of silicone cuffs around the aorta of Lewis rats. After 21 days, the cuffs were removed, and a subgroup of rat aortas was subjected to secondary balloon injury. Remodeling of wall compartments and cell kinetics were assessed morphometrically at 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28 days after the single and double-injury approaches. Immunohistochemistry was used to assess the distribution of macrophages, smooth muscle cells, and proliferating cells within the layers of the arterial wall in the experimental groups versus sham-operated and untreated controls. RESULTS: After cuff placement, the adventitia initially undergoes significant enlargement, while the media shows a reduction in relative thickness. Accumulation of cells within the adventitia at 3 and 7 days is followed by a marked decline in cell density at 14 days, with simultaneously increasing cell numbers in the intima. At this time, activated macrophages are detected in the adventitia, indicating chronic inflammation. Following cuff placement, mild intimal hyperplasia develops. In the double-injury model, extensive neointimal hyperplasia forms rapidly, with a peak at 14 days. CONCLUSIONS: This new double-injury model is technically easy, and multiple experiments can be accrued in short periods of time. It provides an additional platform to identify new targets and strategies for the prophylaxis of postangioplasty restenosis.