Fakülteler / Faculties

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/11727/1395

Browse

Filters

2018 - 201912020 - 20211

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Turnaoglu, HaleSubject: search.filters.subject.Breast

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Interobserver and Intermethod Variability in Data Interpretation of Breast Strain Elastography in Suspicious Breast Lesions
    (2021) Turnaoglu, Hale; Haberal, Kemal Murat; Arslan, Serdar; Yavuz Colak, Meric; Ulu Ozturk, Funda; Uslu, Nihal; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0781-0036; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8211-4065; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7984-4326; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0294-6874; https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2782-2824; 32950046; AAK-8242-2021; R-9398-2019; AAA-4360-2021; JCP-5266-2023
    Background/aim: Strain elastography has the disadvantage of being operator-dependent. Interobserver variability is observed during image acquisition and interpretation. This study aimed to analyze the interobserver and intermethod variability of strain elastography in image interpretation and evaluate the diagnostic performance combining elasticity score and strain ratio with ultrasonography. Materials and methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 70 breast lesions evaluated with B-mode ultrasonography and strain elastography. B-mode ultrasonography findings, elasticity scores, and strain ratio values were evaluated using static images by two radiologists. BI-RADS assessment of the lesions and the decision of both observers as to whether the biopsy was required using B-mode ultrasonography, and the combined ultrasonography+elasticity score, and the combined ultrasonography+elasticity score+strain ratio were compared with the histopathological results. Also, the interobserver agreement was analyzed for all the combinations. Results: There was very good agreement (weighted kappa = 0.865) between the observers for the elasticity scores. Very good agreement was observed between the observers for BI-RADS assessments using the combined ultrasonography+elasticity score and the combined ultrasonography+elasticity score+strain ratio (weighted kappa = 0.848, and 0.902, respectively). Area under the curve of B-mode ultrasonography, the combined B-mode ultrasonography+elasticity score, and the combined B-mode ultrasonography+elasticity score+strain ratio, were calculated as 0.859, 0.866, and 0.916 for observer 1, and 0.851, 0.829, and 0.916 for observer 2, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the observers' diagnostic performances in any of the combinations (P = 0.703, 0.067, and 0.972, respectively). Conclusion: In the evaluation and further assessment of breast lesions, semiquantitative strain ratio calculation may help improve diagnostic accuracy by reducing interpretational variety, when used together with B-mode ultrasonography and elasticity scoring, especially for inexperienced individuals.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Can Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Prevent Biopsy or Change the Management of BI-RADS (R) Category 4 Breast Lesions?
    (2018) Turnaoglu, Hale; Ozturk, Emine; Yucesoy, Cuneyt; Teber, Mehmet Akif; Turan, Aynur; Ozbalci, Aysu Basak; Seker, Ebru Gaye; Onal, Binnur; Hekimoglu, Baki; 0000-0002-0781-0036; AAK-8242-2021
    The BI-RADS (R) category 4 includes suspicious breast lesions which requires biopsy. The aim of this study is to investigate the contribution of breast magnetic resonance imaging to the management of BI-RADS (R) category 4 breast lesions detected by mammography and/or ultrasonography. Thirty-four lesions classified as BI-RADS (R) category 4A, 4B, or 4C by conventional methods were evaluated with magnetic resonance imaging. All lesions were coded by using the American College of Radiology BI-RADS (R) lexicon. Each lesion was verified with the result of pathology. Lesions were evaluated as BI-RADS (R) category 1 in 1 patient (2.9%), category 3 (20.6%) in 7 patients, category 4 in 25 patients (73.6%), and category 5 in 1 patient (2.9%) with breast magnetic resonance imaging. Only the BI-RADS (R) 4A lesion categories were changed by breast magnetic resonance imaging, and these lesions were pathologically diagnosed as benign. The negative predictive value of breast MRI for BI-RADS (R) category 4A lesions was calculated as 100%. In all BI-RADS (R) category 4 lesions, pathologically 4 lesions found to be high risk and 3 lesions found to be malignant. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive, and negative predictive value of breast magnetic resonance imaging in BI-RADS (R) category 4 lesions were calculated as 100, 29.6, 26.9, and 100%, respectively. The area under the ROC curve was calculated 0.648. Breast magnetic resonance imaging is promising to be used as a problem-solving modality in BI-RADS (R) category 4A breast lesions.