Semi-Quantitative Strain Ratio Determined Using Different Measurement Methods

Comparison of Strain Ratio Values and Diagnostic Performance Using One- versus Two-Region-of-Interest Measurement

Jung Hyun Yoon, Mi Kyung Song, Eunkyung Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

We evaluated the agreement and diagnostic performance of strain ratio values using measurements made with one and two user-defined regions of interest (ROIs) on breast elastography. Two hundred forty-three breast masses of 226 women (mean age: 48.2 y) were included. Ultrasonography (US) and elastography images of the masses were recorded. Strain ratio was measured twice on the same elastography image; strain ratio 1, applying one ROI at the target mass for measurement, and strain ratio 2, applying one ROI at the target mass and another ROI as reference strain. The two strain ratio measurements were in substantial agreement, with an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.655 (95% confidence interval: 0.577–0.722). Specificity, positive predictive value and accuracy (cutoffs: 2.66 and 2.35) were significantly improved for US combined with the two strain ratio measurements (all p values < 0.05). Strain ratios measured using one or two user-defined ROIs were in substantial agreement, both contributing to the improved diagnostic performance of breast US.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)911-917
Number of pages7
JournalUltrasound in Medicine and Biology
Volume43
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017 May 1

Fingerprint

Elasticity Imaging Techniques
breast
Ultrasonography
Breast
Mammary Ultrasonography
correlation coefficients
Confidence Intervals
confidence
cut-off
intervals

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
  • Biophysics
  • Acoustics and Ultrasonics

Cite this

@article{d14c54dfd2a9465eb817cf11a5ea2fdd,
title = "Semi-Quantitative Strain Ratio Determined Using Different Measurement Methods: Comparison of Strain Ratio Values and Diagnostic Performance Using One- versus Two-Region-of-Interest Measurement",
abstract = "We evaluated the agreement and diagnostic performance of strain ratio values using measurements made with one and two user-defined regions of interest (ROIs) on breast elastography. Two hundred forty-three breast masses of 226 women (mean age: 48.2 y) were included. Ultrasonography (US) and elastography images of the masses were recorded. Strain ratio was measured twice on the same elastography image; strain ratio 1, applying one ROI at the target mass for measurement, and strain ratio 2, applying one ROI at the target mass and another ROI as reference strain. The two strain ratio measurements were in substantial agreement, with an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.655 (95{\%} confidence interval: 0.577–0.722). Specificity, positive predictive value and accuracy (cutoffs: 2.66 and 2.35) were significantly improved for US combined with the two strain ratio measurements (all p values < 0.05). Strain ratios measured using one or two user-defined ROIs were in substantial agreement, both contributing to the improved diagnostic performance of breast US.",
author = "Yoon, {Jung Hyun} and Song, {Mi Kyung} and Eunkyung Kim",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2017.01.005",
language = "English",
volume = "43",
pages = "911--917",
journal = "Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology",
issn = "0301-5629",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Semi-Quantitative Strain Ratio Determined Using Different Measurement Methods

T2 - Comparison of Strain Ratio Values and Diagnostic Performance Using One- versus Two-Region-of-Interest Measurement

AU - Yoon, Jung Hyun

AU - Song, Mi Kyung

AU - Kim, Eunkyung

PY - 2017/5/1

Y1 - 2017/5/1

N2 - We evaluated the agreement and diagnostic performance of strain ratio values using measurements made with one and two user-defined regions of interest (ROIs) on breast elastography. Two hundred forty-three breast masses of 226 women (mean age: 48.2 y) were included. Ultrasonography (US) and elastography images of the masses were recorded. Strain ratio was measured twice on the same elastography image; strain ratio 1, applying one ROI at the target mass for measurement, and strain ratio 2, applying one ROI at the target mass and another ROI as reference strain. The two strain ratio measurements were in substantial agreement, with an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.655 (95% confidence interval: 0.577–0.722). Specificity, positive predictive value and accuracy (cutoffs: 2.66 and 2.35) were significantly improved for US combined with the two strain ratio measurements (all p values < 0.05). Strain ratios measured using one or two user-defined ROIs were in substantial agreement, both contributing to the improved diagnostic performance of breast US.

AB - We evaluated the agreement and diagnostic performance of strain ratio values using measurements made with one and two user-defined regions of interest (ROIs) on breast elastography. Two hundred forty-three breast masses of 226 women (mean age: 48.2 y) were included. Ultrasonography (US) and elastography images of the masses were recorded. Strain ratio was measured twice on the same elastography image; strain ratio 1, applying one ROI at the target mass for measurement, and strain ratio 2, applying one ROI at the target mass and another ROI as reference strain. The two strain ratio measurements were in substantial agreement, with an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.655 (95% confidence interval: 0.577–0.722). Specificity, positive predictive value and accuracy (cutoffs: 2.66 and 2.35) were significantly improved for US combined with the two strain ratio measurements (all p values < 0.05). Strain ratios measured using one or two user-defined ROIs were in substantial agreement, both contributing to the improved diagnostic performance of breast US.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85013794503&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85013794503&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2017.01.005

DO - 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2017.01.005

M3 - Article

VL - 43

SP - 911

EP - 917

JO - Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology

JF - Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology

SN - 0301-5629

IS - 5

ER -