Comparison of diagnostic performance and confidence between contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan and non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography plus abdomen ultrasound for hepatic metastasis in patients with breast cancer
Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the performance between noncontrast-enhanced computed tomography (NECT) plus abdominal ultrasound (US) (NECT + US) with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) for the detection of hepatic metastasis in breast cancer patient with postsurgical...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Medical Ultrasound |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.jmuonline.org/article.asp?issn=0929-6441;year=2022;volume=30;issue=2;spage=116;epage=124;aulast=Noh |
| _version_ | 1811295835592327168 |
|---|---|
| author | Hee Yeon Noh Su Joa Ahn Sang Yu Nam Young Rock Jang Yong Soon Chun Heung Kyu Park Seung Joon Choi Hye Young Choi Jeong Ho Kim |
| author_facet | Hee Yeon Noh Su Joa Ahn Sang Yu Nam Young Rock Jang Yong Soon Chun Heung Kyu Park Seung Joon Choi Hye Young Choi Jeong Ho Kim |
| author_sort | Hee Yeon Noh |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the performance between noncontrast-enhanced computed tomography (NECT) plus abdominal ultrasound (US) (NECT + US) with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) for the detection of hepatic metastasis in breast cancer patient with postsurgical follow-up. Methods: A total of 1470 patients without already diagnosed hepatic metastasis were included. All patients underwent US and multiphase CECT including the NECT. Independent reviewers analyzed images obtained in four settings, namely, abdominal US, NECT, NECT + US, and CECT and recorded liver metastases using a 5-grade scale of diagnostic confidence. Sensitivity, specificity (diagnostic performance), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC, diagnostic confidence) were calculated. Interoperator agreement was calculated using the kappa test. Results: Reference standards revealed no metastases in 1108/1470 patients, and metastasis was detected in 362/1470 patients. Abdominal US (P < 0.01) and NECT (P = 0.01) significantly differed from CECT, but NECT + US did not significantly differ from CECT in terms of sensitivity (P = 0.09), specificity (P = 0.5), and AUC (P = 0.43). After an additional review of abdominal US, readers changed the diagnostic confidence scores of 106 metastatic lesions diagnosed using NECT. Interobserver agreements were good or very good in all four settings. Additional review of abdominal US with NECT allowed a change in the therapeutic plan of 108 patients. Conclusion: Abdominal US + NECT showed better diagnostic performance for the detection of hepatic metastases than did NECT alone; its diagnostic performance and confidence were similar to those of CECT. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T05:39:28Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-7f77df70ce9845bd886241fdc27dd490 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0929-6441 2212-1552 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T05:39:28Z |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Medical Ultrasound |
| spelling | doaj.art-7f77df70ce9845bd886241fdc27dd4902022-12-22T03:00:09ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Medical Ultrasound0929-64412212-15522022-01-0130211612410.4103/JMU.JMU_58_21Comparison of diagnostic performance and confidence between contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan and non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography plus abdomen ultrasound for hepatic metastasis in patients with breast cancerHee Yeon NohSu Joa AhnSang Yu NamYoung Rock JangYong Soon ChunHeung Kyu ParkSeung Joon ChoiHye Young ChoiJeong Ho KimBackground: The purpose of this study was to compare the performance between noncontrast-enhanced computed tomography (NECT) plus abdominal ultrasound (US) (NECT + US) with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) for the detection of hepatic metastasis in breast cancer patient with postsurgical follow-up. Methods: A total of 1470 patients without already diagnosed hepatic metastasis were included. All patients underwent US and multiphase CECT including the NECT. Independent reviewers analyzed images obtained in four settings, namely, abdominal US, NECT, NECT + US, and CECT and recorded liver metastases using a 5-grade scale of diagnostic confidence. Sensitivity, specificity (diagnostic performance), and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC, diagnostic confidence) were calculated. Interoperator agreement was calculated using the kappa test. Results: Reference standards revealed no metastases in 1108/1470 patients, and metastasis was detected in 362/1470 patients. Abdominal US (P < 0.01) and NECT (P = 0.01) significantly differed from CECT, but NECT + US did not significantly differ from CECT in terms of sensitivity (P = 0.09), specificity (P = 0.5), and AUC (P = 0.43). After an additional review of abdominal US, readers changed the diagnostic confidence scores of 106 metastatic lesions diagnosed using NECT. Interobserver agreements were good or very good in all four settings. Additional review of abdominal US with NECT allowed a change in the therapeutic plan of 108 patients. Conclusion: Abdominal US + NECT showed better diagnostic performance for the detection of hepatic metastases than did NECT alone; its diagnostic performance and confidence were similar to those of CECT.http://www.jmuonline.org/article.asp?issn=0929-6441;year=2022;volume=30;issue=2;spage=116;epage=124;aulast=Nohbreast cancerhepatic metastasisnoncontrast-enhanced computed tomographyultrasonography |
| spellingShingle | Hee Yeon Noh Su Joa Ahn Sang Yu Nam Young Rock Jang Yong Soon Chun Heung Kyu Park Seung Joon Choi Hye Young Choi Jeong Ho Kim Comparison of diagnostic performance and confidence between contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan and non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography plus abdomen ultrasound for hepatic metastasis in patients with breast cancer Journal of Medical Ultrasound breast cancer hepatic metastasis noncontrast-enhanced computed tomography ultrasonography |
| title | Comparison of diagnostic performance and confidence between contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan and non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography plus abdomen ultrasound for hepatic metastasis in patients with breast cancer |
| title_full | Comparison of diagnostic performance and confidence between contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan and non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography plus abdomen ultrasound for hepatic metastasis in patients with breast cancer |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of diagnostic performance and confidence between contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan and non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography plus abdomen ultrasound for hepatic metastasis in patients with breast cancer |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of diagnostic performance and confidence between contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan and non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography plus abdomen ultrasound for hepatic metastasis in patients with breast cancer |
| title_short | Comparison of diagnostic performance and confidence between contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan and non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography plus abdomen ultrasound for hepatic metastasis in patients with breast cancer |
| title_sort | comparison of diagnostic performance and confidence between contrast enhanced computed tomography scan and non contrast enhanced computed tomography plus abdomen ultrasound for hepatic metastasis in patients with breast cancer |
| topic | breast cancer hepatic metastasis noncontrast-enhanced computed tomography ultrasonography |
| url | http://www.jmuonline.org/article.asp?issn=0929-6441;year=2022;volume=30;issue=2;spage=116;epage=124;aulast=Noh |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT heeyeonnoh comparisonofdiagnosticperformanceandconfidencebetweencontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyscanandnoncontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyplusabdomenultrasoundforhepaticmetastasisinpatientswithbreastcancer AT sujoaahn comparisonofdiagnosticperformanceandconfidencebetweencontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyscanandnoncontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyplusabdomenultrasoundforhepaticmetastasisinpatientswithbreastcancer AT sangyunam comparisonofdiagnosticperformanceandconfidencebetweencontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyscanandnoncontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyplusabdomenultrasoundforhepaticmetastasisinpatientswithbreastcancer AT youngrockjang comparisonofdiagnosticperformanceandconfidencebetweencontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyscanandnoncontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyplusabdomenultrasoundforhepaticmetastasisinpatientswithbreastcancer AT yongsoonchun comparisonofdiagnosticperformanceandconfidencebetweencontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyscanandnoncontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyplusabdomenultrasoundforhepaticmetastasisinpatientswithbreastcancer AT heungkyupark comparisonofdiagnosticperformanceandconfidencebetweencontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyscanandnoncontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyplusabdomenultrasoundforhepaticmetastasisinpatientswithbreastcancer AT seungjoonchoi comparisonofdiagnosticperformanceandconfidencebetweencontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyscanandnoncontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyplusabdomenultrasoundforhepaticmetastasisinpatientswithbreastcancer AT hyeyoungchoi comparisonofdiagnosticperformanceandconfidencebetweencontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyscanandnoncontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyplusabdomenultrasoundforhepaticmetastasisinpatientswithbreastcancer AT jeonghokim comparisonofdiagnosticperformanceandconfidencebetweencontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyscanandnoncontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyplusabdomenultrasoundforhepaticmetastasisinpatientswithbreastcancer |