ASSESSMENT OF VASCULARITY WITH DOPPLER ULTRASONOGRAPHY METHODS IN PATIENTS OF PUBERTY PRECOCIOUS WITH THELARCHE

Year 2023, Volume: 24 Issue: 1, 83 - 88, 03.01.2023

Cansu Öztürk , Özlem Güngör , Derya Buluş , Merve Kaşıkcı , Selma Uysal Ramadan

https://doi.org/10.18229/kocatepetip.981719

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to investigate the correlation between breast vascularity level and Tanner staging in the evaluation of thelarche, and to compare Doppler methods for demonstrating vascularity.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Girls aged 6–10 who were referred to the radiology clinic with a complaint of breast swelling and prediagnosed with precocious puberty between October and December 2017 were included in the study. Breast ultrasonography (US) and color doppler ultrasonography (CDUS) examinations were performed on all participants. Age, Follicle Stimulating Hormone (FSH), Luteinizing Hormone (LH), Estradiol (E2), thelarche stage, both breast volumes were recorded for all participants. Vascular scores were measured for both breasts using imaging modalities such as color doppler (CD), Power US (PD), and superb microvascular imaging (SMI).
RESULTS: We included 116 girls and 213 thelarche breasts in the study. A significant correlation was found between the depth and transverse and longitudinal diameter for each breast and breast volume and Tanner stages (rs = 0.762, rs = 0.830, rs = 0.774 rs = 0.824, respectively; p < 0.001). Although the highest correlation between Doppler methods was found in PD (PD rs =0.68, CD rs =: 0.61, SMI rs =:0.61, p<0.001), the methods did not have any superiority over each other (p>0.05). Vascularization with SMI was demonstrated in 30 of 65 breasts for which vascularization could not be demonstrated with power Doppler. Among these 30 cases, 90% (n = 27) were Tanner stage I and II.
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, although SMI is as successful as conventional Doppler methods in the evaluation of thelarche vascularity, it can provide more data in some cases.

Keywords

Puberty precocious, Ultrasonography, Breast

TELARŞLI PUBERTE PREKOKS HASTALARINDA VASKÜLARİTENİN DOPPLER ULTRASONOGRAFI YÖNTEMLERİ İLE DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Abstract

AMAÇ: Bu çalışmanın amacı; telarş değerlendirilmesinde meme vaskülarite düzeyi ile Tanner evrelemesi arasındaki korelasyonun araştırılması ve vaskülaritenin gösterilmesinde doppler yöntemlerinin karşılaştırılmasıdır.
GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: Ekim - Aralık 2017 tarihleri arasında puberte prekoks ön tanısı ile başvuran ve memede şişlik şikâyeti olan, radyoloji kliniğine refere edilen 6-10 yaş arası kız çocukları çalışmaya dahil edildi. Katılımcıların hepsine meme ultrasonografi (US) ve renkli doppler ultrasonografi (CDUS) tetkiki yapıldı. Tüm katılımcıların takvim yaşı, Folikül Stimülan Hormon (FSH), Luteinizan Hormon (LH), Estradiol (E2), telarş evresi, her iki meme volümü değerlendirildi. Her iki meme için renkli doppler (CD), Power doppler (PD) ve superb mikrovasküler görüntüleme (SMI) yöntemleri kullanılarak vasküler skorlar ölçüldü.
BULGULAR: Çalışmaya 116 kız çocuğu, 213 telarşlı meme dahil edildi. Her bir meme için ölçülen derinlik transvers, longitudinal çap ölçümleri ve meme volümü ile sonografik Tanner sınıflaması arasında anlamlı korelasyon bulundu (sırasıyla: rs=0,762, rs=0,830, rs=0,774 rs=0,824, p<0,001). Doppler yöntemleri arasında en yüksek korelasyon PD’de saptanmakla birlikte (PD rs =0,68, CD rs =: 0,61, SMI rs =:0,61, p<0,001) yöntemlerin birbirlerine üstünlükleri yoktu (p>0,05). PD ile damarlanma gösterilemeyen 65 memeden 30'unda SMI ile damarlanma gösterildi. Bu 30 olgunun %90’ ı (n:27) Tanner evre I ve II’ydi.
SONUÇ: Sonuç olarak; SMI tekniği telarş vaskülaritesinin değerlendirilmesinde konvansiyonel doppler yöntemleri kadar başarılı olmakla birlikte bazı olgularda daha fazla veri sağlayabilir.

Keywords

Puberte prekoks, Ultrasonografi, Doppler, Meme, Puberty precocious, Ultrasonography, Breast

References

• 1. Youn I, Park SH, Lim IS, Kim SJ. Ultrasound assessment of breast development: distinction between premature thelarche and precocious puberty. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204(3):620-4.
• 2. Bruserud IS, Roelants M, Oehme NHB, et al. Ultrasound assessment of pubertal breast development in girls: intra- and interobserver agreement. Pediatr Radiol. 2018;48(11):1576-83.
• 3. García CJ, Espinoza A, Dinamarca V, Navarro O, Daneman A, García H, et al. Breast US in children and adolescents. Radiographics. 2000;20(6):1605-12.
• 4. Dialani V, Baum J, Mehta TS. Sonographic features of gynecomastia. J Ultrasound Med. 2010;29(4):539-47.
• 5. Ramadan SU, Gökharman D, Kaçar M, Koşar P, Koşar U. Assessment of vascularity with color Doppler ultrasound in gynecomastia. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2010;16(1):38-44.
• 6. Yuksekkaya R, Celikyay F, Ozcetin M, Yuksekkaya M, Asan Y. Assessment of color Doppler ultrasonography findings in gynecomastia. Med Ultrason. 2013;15(4):285-8.
• 7. Zhan J, Diao X-H, Jin J-M, Chen L, Chen Y. Superb Microvascular Imaging—A new vascular detecting ultrasonographic technique for avascular breast masses: A preliminary study. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85(5):915-21.
• 8. Durmaz MS, Sivri M. Comparison of superb micro-vascular imaging (SMI) and conventional Doppler imaging techniques for evaluating testicular blood flow. J Med Ultrason (2001). 2018;45(3):443-52.
• 9. Bradley SH, Lawrence N, Steele C, Mohamed Z. Precocious puberty. BMJ. 2020;368:l6597.
• 10. Mazgaj M. Sonography of abdominal organs in precocious puberty in girls. J Ultrason. 2013;13(55):418-24.
• 11. Calcaterra V, Sampaolo P, Klersy C, et al. Utility of breast ultrasonography in the diagnostic work-up of precocious puberty and proposal of a prognostic index for identifying girls with rapidly progressive central precocious puberty. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;33(1):85-91.
• 12. Gokalp G, Topal U, Kizilkaya E. Power Doppler sonography: anything to add to BI-RADS US in solid breast masses? Eur J Radiol. 2009;70(1):77-85.
• 13. Schroeder RJ, Bostanjoglo M, Rademaker J, Maeurer J, Felix R. Role of power Doppler techniques and ultrasound contrast enhancement in the differential diagnosis of focal breast lesions. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(1):68-79.
• 14. Yongfeng Z, Ping Z, Wengang L, Yang S, Shuangming T. Application of a Novel Microvascular Imaging Technique in Breast Lesion Evaluation. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2016;42(9):2097-105.
• 15. Karaca L, Oral A, Kantarci M, et al. Comparison of the superb microvascular imaging technique and the color Doppler techniques for evaluating children's testicular blood flow. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2016;20(10):1947-53.
• 16. Bakdik S, Arslan S, Oncu F, et al. Effectiveness of Superb Microvascular Imaging for the differentiation of intraductal breast lesions. Med Ultrason. 2018;20(3):306-12.
• 17. Park AY, Seo BK, Cha SH, et al. An Innovative Ultrasound Technique for Evaluation of Tumor Vascularity in Breast Cancers: Superb Micro-Vascular Imaging. J Breast Cancer. 2016;19(2):210-3.