Table 2 Comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasound features between patients with and without upgrade to malignancy after surgery
From: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound to predict malignant upgrading of atypical ductal hyperplasia
Variable | Surgical pathology results | Univariable Analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Malignant | Nonmalignant | Odds Ratio (95%CI) | P value | |
Wash-in time | ||||
Meantime/Later | 1 (1.9) | 14 (24.6) | 1 (reference) | |
Earlier | 52 (98.1) | 43 (75.4) | 16.93 (2.14, 133.98) | 0.007 |
Enhancement degree | ||||
Hypo-enhancement | 1 (1.9) | 10(17.5) | 1 (reference) | |
Iso-enhancement | 1 (1.9) | 4 (7.0) | 2.50 (0.12, 50.44) | 0.550 |
Hyper-enhancement | 51 (96.2) | 43 (75.4) | 11.86 (1.46, 96.40) | 0.021 |
Enhancement direction | ||||
Centrifugal/Diffuse | 2 (3.8) | 9 (15.8) | 1 (reference) | |
Centripetal | 51(96.2) | 48(84.2) | 4.78 (0.98,23.26) | 0.053 |
Perfusion defects | ||||
Absent | 37 (69.8) | 53 (93.0) | 1 (reference) | |
Present | 16 (30.2) | 4 (7.0) | 5.73 (1.77,18.52) | 0.004 |
Internal homogeneity | ||||
Homogeneous | 7 (13.2) | 26 (45.6) | 1 (reference) | |
Heterogeneous | 46 (86.8) | 31 (54.4) | 5.51 (2.13,14.26) | < 0.001 |
Enhancement margin | ||||
Well-defined | 10 (18.9) | 37 (64.9) | 1 (reference) | |
Ill-defined | 43 (81.1) | 20 (35.1) | 7.95 (3.31,19.12) | < 0.001 |
Enhancement shape | ||||
Round/Oval | 9 (17.0) | 36 (63.2) | 1 (reference) | |
Irregular | 44 (83.0) | 21 (36.8) | 8.38 (3.42,20.54) | < 0.001 |
Size on CEUS | ||||
Not enlarged | 15 (28.3) | 47 (82.5) | 1 (reference) | |
Enlarged | 38 (71.7) | 10 (17.5) | 11.91 (4.81,29.50) | < 0.001 |
Radial or penetrating vessels | ||||
Absent | 33 (62.3) | 56 (98.2) | 1 (reference) | |
Present | 20 (37.7) | 1 (1.8) | 33.94 (4.35,264.67) | 0.001 |