Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Oncol.
Sec. Breast Cancer
Volume 15 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fonc.2025.1494862

Analysis of the Diagnostic Efficacy of Ultrasound, MRI, and Combined Examination in Benign and Malignant Breast Tumors

Provisionally accepted
Dian pei Ma Dian pei Ma 1Changliang Wang Changliang Wang 2*Jie Li Jie Li 1*Xiaohan Hao Xiaohan Hao 3Yun Zhu Yun Zhu 4Zhi zhen Gao Zhi zhen Gao 1,4*Chun Liu Chun Liu 3*Changfan Luo Changfan Luo 2*Yu Huang Yu Huang 1*
  • 1 Bengbu Medical University, Beng bu, China
  • 2 University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, Anhui Province, China
  • 3 Anhui Fuqing medical equipment Co.LTD, Hefei, Anhui Province, China
  • 4 Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College, Bengbu, Anhui, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Background: To compare the diagnostic effectiveness of ultrasound (US), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and their combined application in distinguishing between benign and malignant breast tumors, with particular emphasis on evaluating diagnostic performance in different breast densities-fatty breast tissue, where fat predominates, and dense breast tissue, which contains a significant amount of fibroglandular tissue. Material and Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 185 patients with breast tumors, including 90 malignant and 95 benign cases. All patients underwent both US and MRI examinations within one week prior to surgery. The diagnostic accuracy of US, MRI, and their combined use in differentiating benign and malignant tumors was evaluated. Results: The combined examination demonstrated the highest area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and negative predictive value (NPV) (0.904, 90%, 90.4%), outperforming US (0.830, 73.3%, 78.6%) and MRI (0.897, 89.7%, 88.8%). DeLong test results revealed statistically significant differences in AUC between US and MRI, as well as between US and the combined examination (P < 0.05). However, the difference in AUC between MRI and the combined examination was not significant (P = 0.939). In patients with fatty breast tissue, no significant differences were found between MRI and US, or between MRI and the combined examination (P = 0.708 and P = 0.317, respectively). However, the diagnostic performance between US and the combined examination was statistically significant (P < 0.05). For patients with dense breast tissue, the differences in diagnostic performance between US and MRI, and between US and the combined examination, were significant (P < 0.05), while the difference between MRI and the combined examination was not significant (P = 0.317). Conclusion: MRI and combined examination methods significantly enhance the ability

    Keywords: Magnetic Resonance Imaging, ultrasound, differential diagnosis, breast cancer, Breast tumors

    Received: 11 Sep 2024; Accepted: 13 Jan 2025.

    Copyright: © 2025 Ma, Wang, Li, Hao, Zhu, Gao, Liu, Luo and Huang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence:
    Changliang Wang, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, 230026, Anhui Province, China
    Jie Li, Bengbu Medical University, Beng bu, China
    Zhi zhen Gao, Bengbu Medical University, Beng bu, China
    Chun Liu, Anhui Fuqing medical equipment Co.LTD, Hefei, Anhui Province, China
    Changfan Luo, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, 230026, Anhui Province, China
    Yu Huang, Bengbu Medical University, Beng bu, China

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.