Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Ultrasound visibility of select breast biopsy markers for targeted axillary node localization following neoadjuvant treatment: simulation using animal tissue models.
Portnow, Leah H; Kwak, Ellie; Senapati, Gunjan M; Kwait, Dylan C; Denison, Christine M; Giess, Catherine S.
Affiliation
  • Portnow LH; Department of Radiology Breast Imaging Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. lportnow@bwh.harvard.edu.
  • Kwak E; Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. lportnow@bwh.harvard.edu.
  • Senapati GM; Department of Radiology Breast Imaging Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
  • Kwait DC; Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
  • Denison CM; Department of Radiology Breast Imaging Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
  • Giess CS; Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Breast Cancer Res Treat ; 184(1): 185-192, 2020 Nov.
Article de En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32770455
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

To compare ultrasound visibility of selected biopsy markers in animal tissue models simulating axillary echotexture.

METHODS:

Four breast biopsy markers were selected based on size, shape, and composition and compared to an institutional standard for testing in beef steak and pork loin phantoms. BD® UltraCor™ Twirl™; Hologic® Tumark® Professional series Q, Vision, and X; and BD® UltraClip™ Dual Trigger wing-shaped (institutional standard) biopsy markers were deployed at superficial (0-2.0 cm) and deep (2.1-4.0 cm) depths in the animal models. An animal model without a biopsy marker served as control. Four participating breast imagers blinded to marker shape and location assessed ultrasound visibility of each biopsy marker using a handheld 5-12 MHz linear array transducer with a 4-point grading system (0, not visible; 1, unsure if visible; 2, visible with difficulty; 3, definite visibility). Each breast imager was asked to select the three most easily visualized biopsy markers.

RESULTS:

Total visibility scores with the four-point grading system demonstrate highest score for the Twirl™ (48/48 points), followed by the Tumark® Q (42/48) and Tumark® Vision (41/48) biopsy markers. Overall individual accuracy scores across all biopsy marker types ranged from 83.3 to 95.8%. Visibility scores based on subjective radiologist assessment also demonstrate the highest vote for the Twirl™ (11), followed by the Tumark® Vision (7) and Tumark® Q (6) biopsy markers. The wing-shaped biopsy marker had the lowest visibility and voter score.

CONCLUSION:

The Twirl™ followed by the Tumark® Q and Vision biopsy markers demonstrates the highest visibility scores using a four-point grading system and by radiologist vote.
Sujet(s)
Mots clés

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Tumeurs du sein / Traitement néoadjuvant Type d'étude: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limites: Animals / Female / Humans Langue: En Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Année: 2020 Type de document: Article Pays d'affiliation: États-Unis d'Amérique Pays de publication: HOLANDA / HOLLAND / NETHERLANDS / NL / PAISES BAJOS / THE NETHERLANDS

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Tumeurs du sein / Traitement néoadjuvant Type d'étude: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limites: Animals / Female / Humans Langue: En Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Année: 2020 Type de document: Article Pays d'affiliation: États-Unis d'Amérique Pays de publication: HOLANDA / HOLLAND / NETHERLANDS / NL / PAISES BAJOS / THE NETHERLANDS