常规超声结合弹性成像对非哺乳期乳腺炎与乳腺癌的诊断价值

Diagnostic Value of Conventional Ultrasound Combined with Elastography for Non-lactating Mastitis and Breast Cancer

目的探究常规超声结合弹性成像对非哺乳期乳腺炎与乳腺癌的诊断价值。方法回顾性分析该院2016年6月—2018年12月收治的35例非哺乳期乳腺炎患者(设为对照组)及35例乳腺癌患者(设为研究组)作为研究对象,两组患者均行常规超声、常规超声结合弹性成像检查,对比两种诊断方法对两组患者诊断的准确率,并比较两组患者的影像表现。结果常规超声、常规超声结合弹性成像对两组的检测准确率差异无统计学意义(对照组vs研究组:60.0%vs 57.1%)、(对照组vs研究组:83.0%vs 5.7%),统计值(χ2=0.173,P=0.667)、(χ^2=0.276,P=0.599),但是组内常规超声结合弹性成像准确率显著高于常规超声(对照组:χ^2=12.980,P=0.000)、(研究组:χ^2=20.028,P=0.000);研究组患者病灶钙化率、后方回声有衰减率及UE参数为4~5分比例均显著高于对照组(钙化率:34.3%vs 97.2%)、(后方回声有衰减率:34.3%vs 20%)、(UE参数4~5分:85.7%vs 25.7%),组间对比差异有统计学意义(钙化:χ^2=87.845,P=0.000)、(后方回声:χ^2=5.169,P=0.023)、(UE参数4~5分:χ^2=72.948,P=0.000)。结论对非哺乳期乳腺炎与乳腺癌患者采用常规超声结合弹性成像检查,不仅能有效提高患者诊断准确率,同时还能使两种疾病病灶显现不同的影像特征,从而为两者鉴别区分提供了重要依据。

Objective To investigate the diagnostic value of conventional ultrasound combined with elastography in non-lactating mastitis and breast cancer. Methods A retrospective analysis of 35 patients with non-lactating mastitis (as the control group) and 35 patients with breast cancer (as the study group) admitted to our hospital from June 2016 to December 2018 as subjects. All patients underwent routine ultrasound, conventional ultrasound combined with elastography. The accuracy of the two diagnostic methods was compared between the two groups, and the imaging performance of the two groups was compared. Results There was no significant difference in the detection accuracy between conventional ultrasound and conventional ultrasound combined with elastography (control group vs study group: 60.0% vs 57.1%), (control group vs study group: 83.0% vs 85.7%), statistical values (χ^2=0.173, P=0.667), (χ^2=0.276, P=0.599), but the accuracy of conventional ultrasound combined with elastography in the group was significantly higher than that of conventional ultrasound (control group: χ^2=12.980, P=0.000), (study group: χ^2=20.028, P=0.000);the calcification rate, posterior echo attenuation rate and UE parameters of the study group were significantly higher than the control group (calcification rate: 34.3% vs 97.2%) (there was decay rate of the rear echo: 34.3% vs 20.0%), (UE parameter 4-5 rate: 85.7% vs 25.7%), the comparison between the groups is statistically significant (calcification: χ^2=87.845, P=0.000) (rear echo: χ^2=5.169, P=0.023), (UE parameter 4-5 points: χ^2=72.948, P=0.000). Conclusion The use of conventional ultrasound combined with elastography in non-lactating mastitis and breast cancer patients cannot only effectively improve the diagnostic accuracy of patients, but also enable different imaging features of the two disease lesions, thus providing an important basis for a distinction between the two.