-
摘要: 乳腺癌已成为全球发病率最高的恶性肿瘤, 筛查可提高其早期诊断率, 对乳腺癌的治疗及预后具有重要意义。乳腺超声是乳腺癌筛查的常用方法, 不仅可作为乳腺X线的补充筛查手段提高检出率, 且可单独用于乳腺癌筛查。近年来, 剪切波弹性成像、超声造影等超声新技术在乳腺癌筛查中的应用正迅速发展。本文将对乳腺超声在乳腺癌早期筛查中的临床应用进展进行综述, 以期为临床医生提供借鉴和参考。
-
关键词:
- 乳腺癌 /
- 超声 /
- 筛查 /
- 超声造影 /
- 自动乳腺超声成像系统
Abstract: Breast cancer has become the most prevalent malignant tumor worldwide. Screening improves the rate of early detection and is important for the treatment and prognosis of breast cancer. Breast ultrasound is a common method for screening breast cancer, which can be used as a complementary screening tool to mammography to improve the rate of detection, or used for screening breast cancer alone. In recent years, the use of new techniques of ultrasound in screening breast cancer such as shear wave elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound, are rapidly developing. This article reviewed the research progress of clinical application of breast ultrasound in screening breast cancer. -
子宫附腔畸形(accessory cavitated uterine malformation, ACUM)是一种罕见的子宫肌层内子宫样囊性病变[1],常见于年轻女性,多伴有严重的痛经或盆腔疼痛,严重影响患者的生活质量。ACUM由Cozzutto于1981年首次提出[2],迄今为止,国内外仅见120余例报道,且多为个案[3-6]。由于其为罕见疾病,临床医师对该病的认识相对不足,导致ACUM常被误诊为残角子宫、子宫肌瘤伴囊性变等疾病。超声成像是妇科疾病的首选影像学检查,可为临床提供病变定位、定量、定性等关键信息,但目前有关ACUM的超声影像学研究较匮乏。本研究回顾性分析北京协和医院近10年经术后病理证实的ACUM患者病例资料,总结其超声声像图特征,分析误诊原因,以期提高超声医师的诊断能力,辅助临床进行正确决策。
1. 资料与方法
1.1 研究对象
本研究为病例系列研究。以2013年12月—2023年12月北京协和医院收治且经术后病理证实为ACUM的所有患者为研究对象,收集其临床基本信息、病理诊断结果、超声及磁共振成像(magnetic resonance imaging, MRI)检查结果以及随访信息。
本研究已通过北京协和医院伦理审查委员会审批(审批号:I-24PJ0809),并豁免患者知情同意。
1.2 方法
1.2.1 影像学检查
采用Philips iU 22、Philips EPIQ 9或Aplio 500型等彩色多普勒超声诊断仪对患者进行超声检查,其中经腹部探头频率2.5~5.0 MHz,经阴道及经直肠探头频率5.0~9.0 MHz。超声检查过程中重点观察子宫形态,肌层病灶位置、形态、大小、边界、回声类型、内部结构、血流分布情况、与宫腔关系等声像图表现。
盆腔MRI检查采用3.0 T及1.5 T磁共振扫描仪,成像序列至少包括横轴位T1WI,采用自旋回波脉冲序列,TR 400~600 ms,TE 10~20 ms;横轴位、冠状位或矢状位T2WI,采用快速自旋回波脉冲序列,TR 2500~5000 ms,TE 50~100 ms。检查前患者适当充盈膀胱,取俯卧位足先进,扫描范围包括整个盆腔。
1.2.2 病理诊断
手术标本经4%中性甲醛固定,常规脱水,石蜡包埋,4 mm切片,常规HE及免疫组化染色。组织学及免疫组化切片由经验丰富的病理医师镜检并诊断,同时记录所有病理的形态学特点,包括组织结构、细胞形态等。
1.2.3 随访
对所有患者进行门诊或电话随访。评估患者手术切口愈合情况,痛经、盆腔痛等临床症状是否持续存在,月经周期是否恢复正常,术后性功能情况,排尿、排便是否存在困难等。
1.3 统计学处理
采用SPSS 26.0软件进行数据描述性分析,计量资料以均数±标准差表示,计数资料以频数或百分数表示。
2. 结果
2.1 临床表现
共11例患者纳入本研究,其中9例因进行性痛经或月经后下腹痛就诊,余2例因超声发现残角子宫就诊。平均确诊年龄(27.1±7.4)岁,平均初潮年龄(13.2±1.7)岁,平均初潮(6.1±5.5)年后出现痛经。3例有生育史,其中1例阴道顺产,2例行剖宫产手术。1例曾行双侧乳腺纤维瘤切除术。
2.2 超声表现
11例患者中,ACUM均为圆韧带附着处下方子宫肌层内的单一病灶,其中6例位于左侧壁,5例位于右侧壁,病灶最大直径1.7~5.3 cm,平均最大直径(3.0±1.0)cm。病灶整体呈形态规则的厚壁囊实性结构,多数呈圆形或椭圆形(90.9%,10/11),边界清晰(72.7%,8/11),与宫腔不相通(100%,11/11)。所有病灶内部均可见囊性空腔,平均最大直径(1.6±0.6)cm,10例(90.9%,10/11)呈磨玻璃样改变,1例(9.1%,1/11) 呈中高回声,10例(90.9%,10/11)囊腔内衬内膜样线状高回声。病灶周边均由低回声或中等回声肌层包绕。彩色多普勒超声显示病灶周边环状或半环状血流信号。子宫轮廓正常,内膜与子宫肌层分界清晰,肌层未探及明确腺肌症等子宫病变。双侧宫角可见,卵巢及输卵管未见明确异常。11例患者术前均行双侧肾、输尿管、膀胱超声检查,未见明显异常。
2.3 MRI表现
11例ACUM患者术前均行盆腔MRI检查,病灶均位于子宫圆韧带下方肌层内,为圆形宫腔样结构,病灶中央呈短T1信号,与宫腔不相通。11例患者均为单宫体,双侧宫角可见,盆腔内未见其他部位子宫内膜异位症。
2.4 影像学诊断及漏误诊情况分析
11例患者中,首次超声检查正确诊断为ACUM 6例,误诊为输卵管积水或残角子宫2例,不能明确诊断3例。首次MRI检查正确诊断为ACUM 5例,误诊为残角子宫3例(其中2例超声正确诊断且提示双侧宫角正常),误诊为卵巢子宫内膜异位症1例,不能明确诊断2例。详见表 1。
表 1 11例ACUM病例首诊超声及MRI诊断结果Table 1. Initial diagnosis of ultrasound and MRI examination of 11 patients with ACUM病例编号 超声 MRI诊断 方式 诊断 1 经阴道 ACUM ACUM 2 经腹 性质待定 ACUM 3 经阴道 残角子宫 残角子宫 4 经阴道 ACUM/腺肌瘤 ACUM 5 经阴道 输卵管积水 ACUM 6 经阴道 ACUM 残角子宫 7 经腹 ACUM 残角子宫 8 经直肠 ACUM ACUM/残角子宫 9 经腹 ACUM ACUM/肌瘤变性 10 经阴道 ACUM/腺肌瘤 卵巢子宫内膜异位症 11 经阴道 ACUM ACUM ACUM(accessory cavitated uterine malformation):子宫附腔畸形;MRI(magnetic resonance imaging):磁共振成像 2.5 治疗及随访情况
11例患者均行腹腔镜下子宫病灶切除术,圆韧带处可见子宫肌层略隆起(图 1A),2例固有韧带及骶韧带处见蓝紫色结节(图 1B),经术后病理证实为腹膜型子宫内膜异位症。切开后可见巧克力样液体流出(图 1C、1D),内壁示褐色内膜样组织(图 1E),包块整体呈厚壁空腔样结构(图 1F)。截至2023年12月31日,11例患者术后随访3~14个月,均恢复正常月经,症状明显缓解。
图 1 ACUM患者腹腔镜下手术术中影像及大体标本A.子宫左侧圆韧带下方轻度隆起;B.固有韧带处见蓝紫色内异灶结节;C、D.病灶切开后可见巧克力样液体流出;E.附腔包块内见褐色内膜样组织;F.大体标本示厚壁空腔包块Figure 1. Laparoscopic and macroscopic images of patients with ACUMA.laparoscopic view shows a mass bulging on the surface of the left-sided myometrium; B.a blue-purple endometriosis around the ligaments; C/D.the drainage of chocolate-colored fluid from the cavity during the excision of ACUM; E.brown endometrial-like tissue inside the inner part of the lesion; F.macroscopic image shows a cavitated mass with a thick muscular wall
ACUM: 同表 13. 讨论
3.1 ACUM一般临床特征
ACUM是一种子宫肌层内非交通性囊性病灶,既往研究中不同术语用于描述该病,包括子宫样包块、青少年型囊性腺肌瘤等[3, 7]。其发生机制尚不明确,目前存在3种理论学说[8],包括:(1)先天性发育异常学说;(2)异位学说;(3)化生学说。其中先天性发育异常学说更被普遍接受,学者们认为ACUM可能是由子宫圆韧带附着处的苗勒氏管组织重复或持续存在造成的,与引带功能障碍有关[9]。然而,美国生殖医学学会苗勒氏管异常分类尚未将ACUM归为其中[10]。
虽然ACUM多发生于年轻女性,但也有文献报道患者年龄>30岁[6, 11-12]。此外ACUM可发生于分娩或宫腔操作后[11-12]。本组病例中,3例发病年龄>30岁,3例有生育史,与既往文献报道一致。ACUM常表现为严重的进行性痛经或盆腔痛,初潮与痛经发病时间间隔长短不一,可至初潮13年后发生痛经[3]。本组病例中,ACUM患者平均初潮6.1年后出现痛经。
此外,ACUM与泌尿生殖系统发育异常的关系仍存在争议[3, 8]。Acién等[11]认为,极少数情况下,ACUM可能合并其他类型子宫发育畸形。少数研究报道ACUM合并泌尿系统畸形[3]。本研究中,11例患者泌尿系、双侧卵巢及输卵管术前超声均未提示明确异常,且未合并其他子宫发育异常。
3.2 ACUM超声征象
超声检查具有安全无创、实时便捷的优势,能够清晰显示盆腔解剖结构,准确评估病变位置、大小、血流等情况,是临床医师为患者选择最佳治疗方式的重要影像学参考依据。然而,迄今为止,国内外有关ACUM的文献报道以个案为主,系统性分析ACUM超声表现的研究较少。因此笔者结合既往文献及本研究结果,总结其超声特征,以提高术前影像学诊断率:(1)ACUM多为一侧圆韧带附着处下方子宫肌层内囊实性包块,体积较小,一般不超过3 cm,病灶位置与患者疼痛侧相符;(2)囊腔内可见血内容物样回声,表现为磨玻璃样或中高回声;(3)囊壁多内衬子宫内膜样高回声;(4)包块周边由较厚的低回声或中等回声肌层包绕,周边肌层内可见环形或半环形血流;(5)双侧宫角形态正常,子宫其余部分、双侧卵巢及输卵管多发育正常;(6)未见明确合并子宫腺肌症超声表现(图 2)。
图 2 ACUM患者典型超声声像图特征(箭头)A.子宫左侧宫角下方肌层内厚壁囊实性包块;B.囊腔内局部呈中高回声;C.囊壁内衬线样高回声; D.病灶周边由低回声肌层包绕,周边探及半环状血流信号;E.双侧宫角形态正常;F.右侧卵巢形态大小正常
A、B、C为经阴道超声,D、E、F为经腹超声;ACUM:同表 1Figure 2. Representative pictures of patients with ACUM on ultrasound(arrow)A.a cystic-solid mass with thick wall located under the left uterine horn; B.hyperechoic component within central cavity; C.the cavity lined by hyperechoic endometrium; D.the mass surrounded by hypoechoic muscular layer with semi-circular vascularity; E.bilateral cornua with normal shape; F.the right ovary with normal appearance
A/B/C: transvaginal ultrasound image, D/E/F: transabdominal ultrasound image由于ACUM存在少许有功能的子宫内膜组织,其囊壁内衬的内膜厚度及囊腔透声程度可随月经周期发生变化[6],因此月经前后多次动态观察病灶声像图特征,有助于提高ACUM诊断率。此外,经阴道三维容积成像技术能够清晰显示子宫冠状切面,可准确评估子宫外形轮廓、宫腔全貌,为ACUM解剖定位及与其他子宫梗阻性病变鉴别提供可靠信息。同时,也可通过子宫输卵管造影进一步明确宫腔与病灶的关系。
3.3 误诊分析及鉴别诊断
本研究显示,超声和MRI(图 3)在ACUM的影像表现上具有一致典型特征,且二者的诊断准确率相近(54.5%比45.5%)。其中,超声误诊2例,未明确诊断3例,其主要原因可能在于:(1)ACUM临床罕见,超声医师对该病的声像图特征认识不足,易与残角子宫等其他病变图像混淆;(2)经腹检查受肠气影响较大,病灶内壁线样高回声显示不清。基于上述分析,笔者复阅本研究11例ACUM术前超声图像,总结了该病与其他子宫病变的鉴别诊断要点。
图 3 ACUM患者典型盆腔MRI图像特征(箭头)A.T2WI冠状面示子宫左侧肌层内圆形病灶;B.T2WI横断面示双侧宫角形态正常;C.T1WI横断面示病灶中央呈短TI信号Figure 3. Typical pelvic MRI pictures of patients with ACUM(arrow)A.coronal T2WI MRI image demonstrates an oval left-sided mass in the outer myometrium of the uterus; B.axial T2WI image displays bilateral normal horns; C.central cavity shows high T1 signal on axial T1WI image
ACUM、MRI: 同表 1(1) 残角子宫Ⅱ型:单角子宫与对侧残角子宫宫底之间有凹陷,单角子宫与输卵管相连。对侧残角子宫常呈子宫旁等回声包块,通过带状低回声与子宫相连,包块内部充满细密点状回声,与对侧宫腔及宫颈不相通。而ACUM患者子宫轮廓及两侧宫角形态正常,且动态扫查可见两侧连续的内膜回声与双侧输卵管间质部相连[1, 13]。
(2) Robert's子宫:子宫轮廓正常,非对称性分隔自宫底至子宫颈内口将宫腔分为两部分,一侧与对侧宫腔、宫颈及阴道均不相通,而与该侧输卵管相通,为盲腔,内含功能性内膜。而ACUM位置较固定,多位于子宫圆韧带下方子宫肌层内,病灶周边由子宫肌层包绕,且两侧宫角形态正常[1, 14-15]。
(3) 囊性腺肌瘤:发病年龄较ACUM更大,多因剖宫产或宫腔诊刮等操作引起内膜侵犯子宫肌层,并与肌层组织集结形成结节或团块。其内囊性变为多发小囊性灶(多小于5 mm),内通常缺乏典型的子宫内膜腺体和间质[11, 16-17]。超声图像显示病灶累及子宫内膜与肌层交界处,边界不清,彩色多普勒示病灶内短条状血流信号[11, 16-17]。ACUM位置通常远离子宫内膜,病灶囊腔较大,囊壁内衬完整的内膜样高回声线,且其余子宫肌层部分回声均匀,内膜与子宫肌层分界清晰。
(4) 子宫肌瘤囊性变:患者通常具有子宫肌瘤病史,无明显周期性腹痛。声像图显示病灶可生长于子宫肌层任何部位,数目不一。其发生囊性变时,病灶中央可能出现单一的无回声区,但囊腔内并无内膜样高回声,且少有血性内容物[18]。
(4) 输卵管积水:典型超声表现为附件区腊肠样或“S”形液性暗区,部分病灶内壁不光滑,可见由输卵管皱襞构成的小凸起。大量积液时表现为椭圆形或哑铃型无回声,囊壁薄、光滑,囊腔内见不完全分隔[19]。
综上所述,ACUM是一种罕见的子宫梗阻性病变,发病机制尚未明确,多见于年轻女性,常伴有进行性严重痛经。ACUM具有典型的影像学特征,声像图表现为一侧圆韧带附着处下方子宫肌层内形态规则的厚壁囊实性包块。此外,注重图像前后对比,分析囊腔内膜及透声度变化,可获取更多的诊断信息。加强对本病临床及超声特征认识,可提高超声医师对该病的正确诊断,进而推动罕见疾病的早期诊疗,促进女性生命健康。
作者贡献:汪颖姣负责查阅文献、撰写文章;王立洪、李如茵负责查阅文献资料;沈松杰负责形成文章框架、修改文章;孙强负责审校文章。利益冲突:所有作者均声明不存在利益冲突 -
[1] Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2021, 71: 209-249. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21660
[2] 赫捷, 陈万青, 李霓, 等. 中国女性乳腺癌筛查与早诊早治指南(2021, 北京)[J]. 中华肿瘤杂志, 2021, 43: 357-382. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112152-20210119-00061 He J, Chen WQ, Li N, et al. China guideline for the screening and early detection of female breast cancer(2021, Beijing)[J]. Zhonghua Zhongliu Zazhi, 2021, 43: 357-382. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112152-20210119-00061
[3] Munoz D, Near AM, van Ravesteyn NT, et al. Effects of screening and systemic adjuvant therapy on ER-specific US breast cancer mortality[J]. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2014, 106: dju289.
[4] 张瑾, 陈薇, 刘蕾. 2017年《NCCN乳腺癌筛查和诊断临床实践指南》(第1版)更新与解读[J]. 中国全科医学, 2017, 20: 2939-2943. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-9572.2017.24.001 Zhang J, Chen W, Liu L. Updates and Interpretations of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines for Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis(Version 1, 2017)[J]. Zhongguo Quanke Yixue, 2017, 20: 2939-2943. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-9572.2017.24.001
[5] 沈松杰, 孙强. 中国女性乳腺癌筛查现状及适宜模式探索[J]. 协和医学杂志, 2018, 9: 298-302. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-9081.2018.04.003 Shen SJ, Sun Q. Current Status and Suitable Mode Evaluation of Breast Carcinoma Screening in Chinese Women[J]. Xiehe Yixue Zazhi, 2018, 9: 298-302. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-9081.2018.04.003
[6] Oeffinger KC, Fontham ET, Etzioni R, et al. Breast Cancer Screening for Women at Average Risk: 2015 Guideline Update From the American Cancer Society[J]. JAMA, 2015, 314: 1599-1614. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2015.12783
[7] 周星彤, 沈松杰, 孙强. 中国乳腺癌筛查现状及进展[J]. 中国医学前沿杂志(电子版), 2020, 12: 6-11. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YXQY202003002.htm Zhou XT, Shen SJ, Sun Q. Current situation and progress of breast cancer screening in China[J]. Zhongguo Yixue Qianyan Zazhi(Dianzi Ban), 2020, 12: 6-11. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YXQY202003002.htm
[8] 肖瑶, 宋宏萍, 巨艳, 等. 乳腺X线联合超声检查对乳腺癌筛查的研究进展[J]. 中华实用诊断与治疗杂志, 2019, 33: 400-402. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HNZD201904028.htm Xiao Y, Song HP, Ju Y, et al. Progress in screening of breast cancer by mammography combined with ultrasono-graphy[J]. Zhonghua Shiyong Zhenduan Yu Zhiliao Zazhi, 2019, 33: 400-402. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HNZD201904028.htm
[9] Brem RF, Lenihan MJ, Lieberman J, et al. Screening breast ultrasound: past, present, and future[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2015, 204: 234-240. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.13.12072
[10] Omidiji OA, Campbell PC, Irurhe NK, et al. Breast cancer screening in a resource poor country: Ultrasound versus mammography[J]. Ghana Med J, 2017, 51: 6-12. DOI: 10.4314/gmj.v51i1.2
[11] 曹秋月, 黄敏. 乳腺癌超声诊断的现状和进展[J]. 临床超声医学杂志, 2012, 14: 183-186. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-6978.2012.03.016 Cao QY, Huang M. The current situation and progress of ultrasound in diagnosis of breast cancer[J]. Linchuang Chaosheng Yixue Zazhi, 2012, 14: 183-186. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-6978.2012.03.016
[12] Ohuchi N, Suzuki A, Sobue T, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of mammography and adjunctive ultrasonography to screen for breast cancer in the Japan Strategic Anti-cancer Randomized Trial (J-START): a randomised controlled trial[J]. Lancet, 2016, 387: 341-348. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00774-6
[13] Tagliafico AS, Calabrese M, Mariscotti G, et al. Adjunct Screening With Tomosynthesis or Ultrasound in Women With Mammography-Negative Dense Breasts: Interim Report of a Prospective Comparative Trial[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2016, 34: 1882-1888. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.4147
[14] Berg WA, Zhang Z, Lehrer D, et al. Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk[J]. JAMA, 2012, 307: 1394-1404. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2012.388
[15] Won SY, Park HS, Kim EK, et al. Survival Rates of Breast Cancer Patients Aged 40 to 49 Years according to Detection Modality in Korea: Screening Ultrasound versus Mammography[J]. Korean J Radiol, 2021, 22: 159-167. DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2019.0588
[16] Zulfiqar M, Rohazly I, Rahmah M. Do the majority of Malaysian women have dense breasts on mammogram?[J]. Biomed Imaging Interv J, 2011, 7: e14.
[17] Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL, et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: compari-son of interval- and screen-detected cancers[J]. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2000, 92: 1081-1087. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/92.13.1081
[18] Rim A, Chellman-Jeffers M. Trends in breast cancer screening and diagnosis[J]. Cleve Clin J Med, 2008, 75: S2- S9.
[19] Shen S, Zhou Y, Xu Y, et al. A multi-centre randomised trial comparing ultrasound vs mammography for screening breast cancer in high-risk Chinese women[J]. Br J Cancer, 2015, 112: 998-1004. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2015.33
[20] Berg WA, Bandos AI, Mendelson EB, et al. Ultrasound as the Primary Screening Test for Breast Cancer: Analysis From ACRIN 6666[J]. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2015, 108: djv367.
[21] 闫晔. 中国女性乳腺腺体密度分布及其影响因素的研究[D]. 天津: 天津医科大学, 2014. [22] Geisel J, Raghu M, Hooley R. The Role of Ultrasound in Breast Cancer Screening: The Case for and Against Ultrasound[J]. Semin Ultrasound CT MR, 2018, 39: 25-34. DOI: 10.1053/j.sult.2017.09.006
[23] Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2007, 356: 227-236. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa062790
[24] Scaperrotta G, Ferranti C, Costa C, et al. Role of sonoelastography in non-palpable breast lesions[J]. Eur Radiol, 2008, 18: 2381-2389. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-008-1032-8
[25] Guo R, Lu G, Qin B, et al. Ultrasound Imaging Technolo-gies for Breast Cancer Detection and Management: A Review[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 2018, 44: 37-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2017.09.012
[26] 梁平, 赖胜坤, 何立红, 等. 超声综合检查对乳腺癌筛查的临床诊断价值分析[J]. 医学影像学杂志, 2015, 25: 1121-1124. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XYXZ201506060.htm Liang P, Lai SK, He LH, et al. Analysis of the clinical value of ultrasonography in the diagnosis breal cancer screening examination[J]. Yixue Yingxiangxue Zazhi, 2015, 25: 1121-1124. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XYXZ201506060.htm
[27] Lee SH, Chang JM, Kim WH, et al. Differentiation of benign from malignant solid breast masses: comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional shear-wave elastography[J]. Eur Radiol, 2013, 23: 1015-1026. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-012-2686-9
[28] Sim YT, Vinnicombe S, Whelehan P, et al. Value of shear-wave elastography in the diagnosis of symptomatic invasive lobular breast cancer[J]. Clin Radiol, 2015, 70: 604-609. DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2015.02.004
[29] 刘健, 王宁, 武敬平, 等. 剪切波弹性成像联合常规超声诊断乳腺癌的价值[J]. 医学研究杂志, 2020, 49: 122-125, 131. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YXYZ202011029.htm Liu J, Wang N, Wu JP, et al. Shear Wave Elastography Combined Conventional Ultrasound for Breast Cancer Diagnosis[J]. Yixue Yanjiu Zazhi, 2020, 49: 122-125, 131. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YXYZ202011029.htm
[30] Sridharan A, Eisenbrey JR, Dave JK, et al. Quantitative Nonlinear Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of the Breast[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2016, 207: 274-281. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.16.16315
[31] Lashkari A, Pak F, Firouzmand M. Full Intelligent Cancer Classification of Thermal Breast Images to Assist Physician in Clinical Diagnostic Applications[J]. J Med Signals Sens, 2016, 6: 12-24. DOI: 10.4103/2228-7477.175866
[32] Li CY, Gong HY, Ling LJ, et al. Diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and enhanced magnetic resonance for breast nodules[J]. J Biomed Res, 2018, 32: 198-207.
[33] Janu E, Krikavova L, Little J, et al. Prospective evaluation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound of breast BI-RADS 3-5 lesions[J]. BMC Med Imaging, 2020, 20: 66. DOI: 10.1186/s12880-020-00467-2
[34] Pan J, Tong W, Luo J, et al. Does contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) play a better role in diagnosis of breast lesions with calcification? A comparison with MRI[J]. Br J Radiol, 2020, 93: 20200195. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20200195
[35] Brem RF, Tabár L, Duffy SW, et al. Assessing improve-ment in detection of breast cancer with three-dimensional automated breast US in women with dense breast tissue: the SomoInsight Study[J]. Radiology, 2015, 274: 663-673. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.14132832
[36] Wilczek B, Wilczek HE, Rasouliyan L, et al. Adding 3D automated breast ultrasound to mammography screening in women with heterogeneously and extremely dense breasts: Report from a hospital-based, high-volume, single-center breast cancer screening program[J]. Eur J Radiol, 2016, 85: 1554-1563. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.06.004
-
期刊类型引用(1)
1. 李冰,吴朋文,牛三强,杜宁宁. 误诊为盆腔包块的子宫附腔畸形原因分析. 临床误诊误治. 2025(02): 20-24 . 百度学术
其他类型引用(0)
计量
- 文章访问数: 1690
- HTML全文浏览量: 295
- PDF下载量: 278
- 被引次数: 1