Application of sonoelastography: Comparison of performance between mass and non-mass lesion

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the performance of the conventional ultrasonography (US) and sonoelastography (SE) in three conditions of all lesions, confined to mass, and confined to non-mass lesion and to compare the performance of each modality between mass and non-mass lesion. A total 364 patients with 375 lesions were evaluated with US and subsequently SE before performing US-guided biopsy. Two radiologists retrospectively analyzed conventional US and elasticity images by consensus. The US findings were classified as mass or non-mass lesion. With final pathology as reference, in each case of all lesions, masses, and non-mass lesions, areas under the ROC curves (Az) were calculated and compared for the two techniques. The comparison of Az values between the curves for US and SE, and between the curves for mass and non-mass lesion was performed. Among 375 lesions, 104 (28%) lesions were malignant and 271 (72%) lesions were benign. 36 (9.6%) of 375 lesions were classified as non-mass lesion at US. There were statistically significant difference of performance between US and SE in cases of all lesion (p=0.003) and mass (p=0.023). However, there was no statistically significant difference of performance in case of non-mass lesion (p=0.5). Comparisons of the Az values of US and SE between mass and non-mass lesions were not statistically significant (p=0.745, p=0.415, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference of performance of US and SE between mass and non-mass lesion.