Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Ultrasonography logoLink to Journal of Ultrasonography
. 2018 Mar 30;18(72):29–36. doi: 10.15557/JoU.2018.0005

Diagnostic accuracy of sonoelastography in different diseases

Iqra Manzoor 1,✉, Raham Bacha 2, Syed Amir Gilani 3
PMCID: PMC5911716  PMID: 29844938

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of sonoelastography in patients of primary and secondary health care settings. Google scholar, PubMed, Medline, Medscape, Wikipedia and NCBI were searched in October 2017 for all original studies and review articles to identify the relevant material. Two reviewers independently selected articles for evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of sonoelastography in different diseases based on titles and abstracts retrieved by the literature search. The accuracy of sonoelastography in different diseases was used as the index text, while B-mode sonography, micro pure imaging, surgery and histological findings were used as reference texts. Superficial lymph nodes, neck nodules, malignancy in thyroid nodules, benign and malignant cervical lymph nodes, thyroid nodules, prostate carcinoma, benign and malignant breast abnormalities, liver diseases, parotid and salivary gland masses, pancreatic masses, musculoskeletal diseases and renal disorders were target conditions. The data extracted by the two reviewers concerning selected study characteristics and results were presented in tables and figures. In total, 46 studies were found for breast masses, lymph nodes, prostate carcinoma, liver diseases, salivary and parotid gland diseases, pancreatic masses, musculoskeletal diseases and renal diseases, and the overall sensitivity of sonoelastography in diagnosing all these diseases was 83.14% while specificity was 81.41%. This literature review demonstrates that sonoelastography is characterized by high sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing different disorders of the body.

Keywords: sonoelastography, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, different diseases

Introduction

Elastography is a non-invasive technique used to differentiate the elasticity of the diseased and normal tissue. Elastography is used in different modalities of radiology, including ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging, while sonoelastography is most commonly used of all modalities. Since the mid-1990s, elastography has been in use for evaluation of stiffness and elasticity of soft tissues by giving external pressure(1). It is an alternative technique for biopsy as it is safe and non-invasive. It can detect stiffness and elasticity of muscles as well as other tissues of the body. When a disease develops in the body, the tissues of that particular area become stiff as compared with adjacent normal tissues. When compression is applied to abnormal tissue, it deforms less as compared with normal tissue. Malignant tumors, in which tissue becomes stiffer in comparison with normal tissues, may serve as an example. The standard method used for detection of lesions is palpation, but if a lesion is too small or if it is located too deep, palpation is not useful, and sonoelastography can help clinicians make an accurate diagnosis. Elastography is based on the principle of tissue deformity upon application of external pressure. During elastography, internal or external pressure is applied to tissues, which results in their displacement. If the examined tissue is malignant, it displaces to a lesser degree as malignant tissues become hard. On the other hand, if the tissue is benign, displacement is high because the tissue is soft(1,2). The variation in the soft tissue elasticity helps characterize focal and diffuse pathologies(1,3). During sonoelastography, images are obtained before and after compression and then deformation is evaluated. Tissue hardness or softness appears in the ultrasound monitor in a color box. On an elastogram, soft areas appear as red or yellow, the green color represents firm areas with intermittent stiff areas while hard areas appear as blue. Tissue hardness and elasticity increases due to increased fibrosis and desmoplastic reaction(2,4,5). There are generally 3 techniques of sonoelastography. The first of them is based on mechanical stress where tissue is stressed by internal or external forces. The technique in which the sonologist applies manual compression with the help of the transducer is known as quasi-static elastography (also known as strain imaging); it is a very common technique. The right angle and appropriate compression are necessary and, when not done properly, the image will contain many artifacts. Moreover, in order to obtain an appropriate elastogram, compression has to be applied at least twice(5–8). The third technique is supersonic elasticity imaging (SSI), or shear wave elasticity imaging (SWEI), in which acquisition time is <30 s. The speed of shear waves in soft tissues is a thousand to hundred times slower than longitudinal waves, but high in hard tissues. The propagation speed of shear waves is then directly related to tissue stiffness. Shear wave elastography is similar to acoustic radiation force impulse imaging (ARFI)(5,9). It can be applied clinically for the diagnosis of breast masses, lymph nodes, prostate carcinoma, liver diseases, salivary and parotid gland diseases, pancreatic masses, musculoskeletal diseases and renal diseases. The aim of our study is to evaluate the accuracy of sonoelastography in diagnosing different disorders with the help of previously published studies.

Methods

Search strategy

Two reviewers (I.M and R.B) searched the Google scholar, PubMed, NCBI, Medline and Medscape databases from 2007 up to 2015 with the following key terms: diagnostic accuracy, sonoelastography, sensitivity, specificity, superficial lymph nodes, neck nodules, malignancy in thyroid nodules, benign and malignant cervical lymph nodes, thyroid nodules, prostate carcinoma, benign and malignant breast abnormalities, liver diseases, parotid and salivary gland masses, pancreatic masses, musculoskeletal diseases and renal disorders.

Selection criteria

Two reviewers (I.M and R.B) independently screened the titles and abstracts of the relevant articles and full articles for inclusion and extraction of data. Any disagreement between the reviewers was resolved by means of a consensus. Studies were eligible if they included information about superficial lymph nodes, neck nodules, malignancy in thyroid nodules, benign and malignant cervical lymph nodes, thyroid nodules, prostate carcinoma, benign and malignant breast abnormalities, liver diseases, parotid and salivary gland masses, pancreatic masses, musculoskeletal diseases, renal disorders and diagnostic accuracy of sonoelastography in these diseases.

Data synthesis

The eligible studies were first categorized, and the analysis of the data was performed according to the target conditions. We retrieved the sensitivity and specificity relating to the selected diseases for each individual study and made forest plots. A table was also made for predefined subgroups of types of articles, country, sample sizes as well as sensitivity and specificity values (Tab. 1). Data analysis was performed with the help of Microsoft excel 2017 and Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 24 (SPSS 24, IBM, Armonk, NY, United States of America).

Tab. 1.

Characteristics of the included studies

Study year Country Type of article Technique Disease Sensitivity % Specificity% Sample size Journal
2012(10) China Meta-analysis Sonoelastography Superficial malignant lymph nodes 74 90 9 articles European Journal of Radiology
Sonoelastography Superficial Benign lymph nodes 90 88
2009(11) Italy Original research Sonoelastography Thyroid nodules 82 88 25 Journal of Ultrasound
Sonoelastography Deep lymph nodes in mediastinum or abdomen 85 92
Sonoelastography Cervical lymph nodes 75 80
2015(12) USA Original research Sonoelastography Malignancy in thyroid nodules 79 77 not reported Abdominal Imaging
2009(13) Different centers of Europe Original research Sonoelastography Superficial lymph nodes 92 83 101 World Journal of Gastroenterology
2012(14) Romania Original research Sonoelastography Benign cervical lymph nodes 67 97 69 Medical Ultrasonography
Sonoelastography Malignant cervical lymph nodes 71 97
2013(15) Romania Review article Sonoelastography Superficial lymphadenopathy 42 100 not reported Medical Ultrasonography
2008(16) Japan Original research Sonoelastography Cervical lymph nodes 83 100 85 American Journal of Roentgenology
2009(17) Republic of Korea Original research Sonoelastography Thyroid nodules 70 100 45 American Journal of Roentgenology
201218) Turkey Original research Sonoelastography Thyroid nodules 86 82 74 American Journal of Roentgenology
Sonoelastography Thyroid nodules 89 82
2013(19) USA Review article Sonoelastography Lymph nodes 86 66 24 articles American Journal of Roentgenology
2012(20) China Original research Sonoelastography Enlarged cervical lymph nodes 98 64 93 Asian Pacific Journal for Cancer Prevention
2010(21) Original research Sonoelastography Prostate carcinoma 90 79 Journal of Urology
2009(22) Japan Original research Sonoelastography Prostate carcinoma 73 90 311 Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology
2010(23) Japan Original research Sonoelastography Prostate carcinoma 72 86 87 Journal of Urology
2008(24) Japan Original research Sonoelastography Prostate carcinoma 68 81 107 Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
2008(25) Germany Original research Sonoelastography Prostate carcinoma 75 77 109 European Urology
2008(26) Austria Original research Sonoelastography Prostate carcinoma 88 72 not reported Abdominal Imaging
2007(27) Austria Original research Sonoelastography Prostate carcinoma 80 79 15 British Journal of Urology International
2010(28) NR Original research Sonoelastography Prostate carcinoma 88 79 not reported Journal of Radiotherapy and Oncology
2015(29) USA Pictorial Essay Sonoelastography Prostate carcinoma 72 76 not reported Abdominal Imaging
2011(30) Republic of Korea Original research Sonoelastography Axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer 81 67 62 Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine
2009(31) China Original research Sonoelastography Breast lesions 98 44 104 Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine
2008(32) Italy Original research Sonoelastography Non-palpable breast lesions 80 81 278 European Radiology
2012(33) USA Review article Sonoelastography Malignant breast abnormalities 88 98 9 articles Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
Sonoelastography Benign breast abnormalities 83 72
2010(34) Italy Original research Sonoelastography Breast nodules 89 93 110 La Radiologia Medica
2009(35) Italy Original research Sonoelastography Fibrosis staging of chronic liver disease F2-F4 91 80 74 World Journal of Gastroenterology
Sonoelastography F3-F4 96 79
Sonoelastography F4 94 87
2003(36) France Original research Sonoelastography Hepatic fibrosis 93 94 106 Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
2010(37) Japan Original research Sonoelastography Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease 100 91 54 RSNA Radiology
2013(38) Turkey Original research Sonoelastography Parotid gland masses 61 59 75 Acta Radiologica
2010(39) Romania Original research Sonoelastography Pleomorphic adenoma of salivary glands 69 46 70 Medical Ultrasonography
2012(40) India Original research Sonoelastography Inflammatory pancreatic disease 97 93 166 Journal of the Pancreas
2015(29) USA Pictorial Essay Sonoelastography Pancreatic masses 95 69 Abdominal Imaging
2009(13) Different centers of Europe Original research Sonoelastography Pancreatic masses 92 69 101 World Journal of Gastroenterology
2013(41) Tokyo Original research Sonoelastography Achilles tendon 100 86 10 RSNA Radiology
2009(42) Austria Original research Sonoelastography Lateral epicondylitis 100 89 38 American Journal of Roentgenology
2011(43) Republic of Korea Original research Sonoelastography Lateral epicondylitis 77 76 48 American Journal of Roentgenology
2015(44) USA Pictorial Essay Sonoelastography Fibrosis in kidney disease 86 95 not reported BMC Nephrology
201245) USA Original research Sonoelastography Chronic kidney disease 80 75 25 Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine
Open in a new tab

Results

Study selection and characteristics

In total, 69 studies were found after the search. Four were excluded due to duplication, 10 did not include sufficient data for our research, and 9 were rejected on the basis of the title and abstract. The flow chart summarizes the flow records through review in Figure 1. Ultimately, 46 studies were included in the analysis, 16 of which were devoted to lymph nodes, 9 to prostate carcinoma, 6 to breast masses, 5 to liver diseases, 3 to pancreatic masses, 3 to musculoskeletal diseases, 2 to renal diseases and 2 to salivary and parotid gland diseases. Thirteen authors were contacted to supplement the data, but sufficient information was not obtained. All the analyses were performed in the clinical and radiology departments of hospitals.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Flowchart of the search and selection process

Data analysis

The data analysis is presented in Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Fig. 4, Fig. 5, Fig. 6, Fig. 7, Fig. 8 and Fig. 9. Characteristics (study year, country, disease, sensitivity, specificity, sample size and journal name) of the included studies are presented in Table 1. Pooled results of overall sensitivity and specificity of sonoelastography in diagnosing different diseases are shown in Table 2. The overall pooled sensitivity and specificity values of sonoelastography in 16 studies concerning the lymph nodes were 79.31% and 86.52%, respectively. As for the 9 studies on prostate carcinoma, the overall pooled sensitivity and specificity of sonoelastography were 78.43% and 79.71%, respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of sonoelastography in diagnosing breast masses in 6 studies addressing this problem were 86.40% and 75.73%, respectively. In 5 studies on liver diseases, the pooled sensitivity of sonoelastography was 94.94% and specificity was 86.22%. In 2 studies addressing the salivary and parotid gland diseases, the pooled sensitivity and specificity of sonoelastography were 64.95% and 52.75%, respectively. As for the 3 studies on pancreatic masses, the overall pooled sensitivity and specificity of sonoelastography were 94.80% is 76.95%, respectively. The overall pooled sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing musculoskeletal diseases in the 3 selected studies were 92.17% and 83.73%, respectively. In the 2 studies addressing renal diseases, the overall pooled sensitivity of sonoelastography was 82.85% and specificity was 85.00% (Tab. 2). None of the analyses found significant heterogeneity between the studies.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Forest plot for lymph nodes

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Open in a new tab

Forest plot for prostate carcinoma

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Open in a new tab

Forest plot for breast masses

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Open in a new tab

Forest plot for liver diseases

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6

Open in a new tab

Forest plot for salivary and parotid gland

Fig. 7.

Fig. 7

Open in a new tab

Forest plot for pancreatic masses

Fig. 8.

Fig. 8

Open in a new tab

Forest plot for musculoskeletal diseases

Fig. 9.

Fig. 9

Open in a new tab

Forest plot for renal diseases

Tab. 2.

Pooled sensitivity and specificity

Disease No of studies Mean sensitivity Mean specificity Std. deviation
Lymph nodes 16 79.31 86.52 13.196
Prostate carcinoma 9 78.43 79.71 8.327
Breast masses 6 86.40 75.73 6.800
Liver diseases 5 94.94 86.22 3.324
Salivary and Parotid Gland 2 64.95 52.75 5.303
Pancreatic masses 3 94.80 76.95 2.406
Musculoskeletal diseases 3 92.17 83.73 13.568
Renal diseases 2 82.85 85.00 4.031
Pooled sensitivity and specificity 46 83.14 81.41 11.902
Open in a new tab

Discussion

Real-time elastography is an innovation in the field of radiology. It is non-invasive and complimentary to conventional B-mode ultrasound. Elastography reduces the number of unwanted biopsies by differentiating between benign and malignant masses. Sonoelastography has been in use for many years for diagnosing many diseases. In a study published in 2008, conducted to investigate the differentiation between malignant and benign breast masses before biopsy, 278 women were included with 293 lesions classified in the BIRADS system (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System). Sonoelastography was performed for all the lesions and 110 of them were found to be malignant and 183 were benign, which also was histologically proven (32). In another study conducted in 2008, the authors wished to learn about the accuracy of B-mode ultrasonography and sonoelastography in the diagnosis of enlarged cervical lymph nodes. For that purpose, 37 patients were enrolled and scanned with B-mode ultrasonography and sonoelastography. The results showed that the accuracy of B-mode ultrasonography was 84%, while the accuracy of sonoelastography was 93%(16). Moreover, sonoelastography is an effective and useful technique for detection of the intratendinous and peritendinous alterations of lateral epicondylitis. It also plays the fundamental role in differentiating between control and diseased extensor tendon origins with high sensitivity and strong correlation with ultrasound findings(42). A prospective study conducted in 2009 aimed to evaluate the accuracy of acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) elastography in assessing liver fibrosis in patients with chronic HCV (hepatitis C). For that purpose, 74 patients were enrolled in the study and underwent tests for aspartate aminotransferase (AST)- to-platelet ratio index (APRI) as well as fibro-max and ARFI elastography. The results show that ARFI elastography has a strong correlation with the results of liver biopsy and that it is accurate and reliable for predicting liver fibrosis(35). Sonoelastography is one of the useful qualitative scoring methods in the diagnosis of salivary gland masses, including parotid and sub-mandibular lesions, in terms of detecting benign and malignant masses(45). During sonoelastography of parotid gland tumors, different signs can be frequently seen, such as: garland sign more for malignant tumors than for benign ones, dense core sign for Pleomorphic adenomas, half-half sign for Warthin’s tumor and bull’s eye sign for parotid cysts(46). The results of the previous studies match with our review article that sonoelastography is highly accurate in diagnosing different clinical disorders.

Conclusion

It is concluded that sonoelastography is an easy, rapid and non-invasive technique for detection of many diseases and has high sensitivity and specificity. Tissue elasticity not only varies across different tissues, but also seems to reflect disease-induced alternations in tissue properties. Real-time sonoelastography has been recently applied to the normal and pathologic tissues in muscle and tendon disorders, and it showed promising results and new potential. Therefore, it is expected to be a useful modality for providing novel diagnostic information in musculoskeletal diseases because tissue elasticity is closely related to musculoskeletal pathology. It can also be used as a research tool to provide insight into the biomechanics and pathophysiology of tissue abnormality.

Conflict of interest

No conflict of interest.

References

  • 1.Tyagi S, Kumar S. Clinical applications of elastography: An overview. Int J Pharma Bio Sciences. 2010;1:1–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Asha V, Upadhyay K. Ultrasound elastography: Implication in the head and neck region. IJSS Case Reports & Reviews. 2014;1:38–41. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Lai C, Yuen M, Fung JY. Clinical application of transient elastography (Fibroscan) in liver diseases. Medical Bulletin. 2009;14:22–25. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Das D, Gupta M, Kaur H, Kalucha A. Elastography: The next step. J Oral Sci. 2011;53:137–141. doi: 10.2334/josnusd.53.137. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Zaleska-Dorobisz U, Kaczorowski K, Pawluś A, Puchalska A, Inglot M. Ultrasound elastography: Review of techniques and its clinical applications. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2014;23:645–655. doi: 10.17219/acem/26301. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Cosgrove D, Piscaglia F, Bamber J, Bojunga J, Correas JM, Gilja OH, et al. EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical use of ultrasound elastography. Part 2: Clinical application. Ultraschall Med. 2013;34:238–253. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1335375. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Aguiló MA, Aquino W, Brigham JC, Fatemi M. An inverse problem approach for elasticity imaging through vibroacoustics. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2010;29:1012–1021. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2009.2039225. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Bamber J, Cosgrove D, Dietrich CF, Fromageau J, Bojunga J, Calliada F, et al. EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical use of ultrasound elastography. Part 1: Basic principles and technology. Ultraschall Med. 2013;34:169–184. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1335205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Choi YJ, Lee JH, Baek JH. Ultrasound elastography for evaluation of cervical lymph nodes. Ultrasonography. 2015;34:157–164. doi: 10.14366/usg.15007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ying L, Hou Y, Zheng HM, Lin X, Xie ZL, Hu YP. Real-time elastography for the differentiation of benign and malignant superficial lymph nodes: a meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:2576–2584. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.10.026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Rubaltelli L, Stramare R, Tregnaghi A, Scagliori E, Cecchelero E, Mannucci M, et al. The role of sonoelastography in the differential diagnosis of neck nodules. J Ultrasound. 2009;12:93–100. doi: 10.1016/j.jus.2009.05.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Anvari A, Barr RG, Dhyani M, Samir AE. Clinical application of sonoelastography in thyroid, prostate, kidney, pancreas, and deep venous thrombosis. Abdom Imaging. 2015;40:709–722. doi: 10.1007/s00261-015-0383-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Giovannini M, Botelberge T, Bories E, Pesenti C, Caillol F, Esterni B, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound elastography for evaluation of lymph nodes and pancreatic masses: A multicenter study. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15:1587–1593. doi: 10.3748/wjg.15.1587. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Lenghel LM, Bolboaca SD, Botar-Jid C, Baciut G, Dudea SM. The value of a new score for sonoelastographic differentiation between benign and malignant cervical lymph nodes. Med Ultrason. 2012;14:271–277. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Dudea SM, Botar-Jid C, Dumitriu D, Vasilescu D, Manole S, Lenghel M. Differentiating benign from malignant superficial lymph nodes with sonoelastography. Med Ultrason. 2013;15:132–139. doi: 10.11152/mu.2013.2066.152.smd1cbj2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Alam F, Naito K, Horiguchi J, Fukuda H, Tachikake T, Ito K. Accuracy of sonographic elastography in the differential diagnosis of enlarged cervical lymph nodes: Comparison with conventional B-mode sonography. Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191:604–610. doi: 10.2214/AJR.07.3401. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Park SH, Kim SJ, Kim EK, Kim MJ, Son EJ, Kwak JY. Interobserver agreement in assessing the sonographic and elastographic features of malignant thyroid nodules. Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193:W416–W423. doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.2541. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Ciledag N, Arda K, Arıbas BK, Aktas E, Köse SK. The utility of ultrasound elastography and MicroPure imaging in the differentiation of benign and malignant thyroid nodules. Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198:W244–W249. doi: 10.2214/AJR.11.6763. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Razavi SA, Hadduck TA, Sadigh G, Dwamena BA. Comparative effectiveness of elastographic and B-mode ultrasound criteria for diagnostic discrimination of thyroid nodules: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:1317–1326. doi: 10.2214/AJR.12.9215. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Teng DK, Wang H, Lin YQ, Sui GQ, Guo F, Sun LN. Value of ultrasound elastography in assessment of enlarged cervical lymph nodes. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2012;13:2081–2085. doi: 10.7314/apjcp.2012.13.5.2081. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Pelzer A, Heinzelbecker J, Kirchner M, Schönberg S, Sroebel P, Dinter D, et al. 2140 real-time elastography compared to 3.0T MRI findings in the localisation and diagnosis of prostate cancer: Preliminary results of a single centre study. J Urol. 2010;183:e832. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Miyagawa T, Tsutsumi M, Matsumura T, Kawazoe N, Ishikawa S, Shimokama T, et al. Real-time elastography for the diagnosis of prostate cancer: Evaluation of elastographic moving images. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2009;39:394–398. doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyp026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Sumura M, Mitsui Y, Arichi N, Hiraoka T, Wake K, Honda S, et al. 2010 real-time balloon inflation elastography of prostate might surpass MRI for detection of prostate cancer. J Urol. 2010;183:e780. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Kamoi K, Okihara K, Ochiai A, Ukimura O, Mizutani Y, Kawauchi A, et al. The utility of transrectal real-time elastography in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2008;34:1025–1032. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2007.12.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Salomon G, Köllerman J, Thederan I, Chun FK, Budäus L, Schlomm T, et al. Evaluation of prostate cancer detection with ultrasound real-time elastography: A comparison with step section pathological analysis after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2008;54:1354–1362. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.02.035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Pallwein L, Aigner F, Faschingbauer R, Pallwein E, Pinggera G, Bartsch G, Schaefer G, Struve P, Frauscher F. Prostate cancer diagnosis: value of real-time elastography. Abdom Imaging. 2008;33:729–735. doi: 10.1007/s00261-007-9345-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Pallwein L, Mitterberger M, Struve P, Pinggera G, Horninger W, Bartsch G, et al. Real‐time elastography for detecting prostate cancer: preliminary experience. BJU Int. 2007;100:42–46. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.06851.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Giurgiu CR, Dudea SM, Coman I. Elastography in the early detection of prostate cancer. J Radiother Med Oncol. 2010;16:89–93. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Anvari A, Barr RG, Dhyani M, Samir AE. Clinical application of sonoelastography in thyroid, prostate, kidney, pancreas, and deep venous thrombosis. Abdom Imaging. 2015;40:709–722. doi: 10.1007/s00261-015-0383-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Choi JJ, Kang BJ, Kim SH, Lee JH, Jeong SH, Yim HW, et al. Role of sonographic elastography in the differential diagnosis of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer. J Ultrasound Med. 2011;30:429–436. doi: 10.7863/jum.2011.30.4.429. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Liu H, Jiang YX, Liu JB, Zhu QL, Sun Q, Chang XY. Contrast‐enhanced breast ultrasonography: Imaging features with histopathologic correlation. J Ultrasound Med. 2009;28:911–920. doi: 10.7863/jum.2009.28.7.911. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Scaperrotta G, Ferranti C, Costa C, Mariani L, Marchesini M, Suman L, et al. Role of sonoelastography in non-palpable breast lesions. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:2381–2389. doi: 10.1007/s00330-008-1032-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Sadigh G, Carlos RC, Neal CH, Dwamena BA. Accuracy of quantitative ultrasound elastography for differentiation of malignant and benign breast abnormalities: A meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;134:923–931. doi: 10.1007/s10549-012-2020-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Regini E, Bagnera S, Tota D, Campanino P, Luparia A, Barisone F, et al. Role of sonoelastography in characterising breast nodules. Preliminary experience with 120 lesions. Radiol Med. 2010;115:551–562. doi: 10.1007/s11547-010-0518-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Fierbinteanu-Braticevici C, Andronescu D, Usvat R, Cretoiu D, Baicus C, Marinoschi G. Acoustic radiation force imaging sonoelastography for noninvasive staging of liver fibrosis. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15:5525–5532. doi: 10.3748/wjg.15.5525. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Sandrin L, Fourquet B, Hasquenoph JM, Yon S, Fournier C, Mal F, et al. Transient elastography: A new noninvasive method for assessment of hepatic fibrosis. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2003;29:1705–1713. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2003.07.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Yoneda M, Suzuki K, Kato S, Fujita K, Nozaki Y, Hosono K, et al. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: US-based acoustic radiation force impulse elastography. Radiology. 2010;256:640–647. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10091662. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Celebi I, Mahmutoglu AS. Early results of real-time qualitative sonoelastography in the evaluation of parotid gland masses: A study with histopathological correlation. Acta Radiol. 2013;54:35–41. doi: 10.1258/ar.2012.120405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Dumitriu D, Dudea SM, Botar-Jid C, Băciuț G. Ultrasonographic and sonoelastographic features of pleomorphic adenomas of the salivary glands. Med Ultrason. 2010;12:175–183. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Mateen MA, Muheet KA, Mohan RJ, Rao PN, Majaz HM, Rao GV, et al. Evaluation of ultrasound based acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) and eSie touch sonoelastography for diagnosis of inflammatory pancreatic diseases. JOP. 2012;13:36–44. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Klauser AS, Miyamoto H, Tamegger M, Faschingbauer R, Moriggl B, Klima G, et al. Achilles tendon assessed with sonoelastography: Histologic agreement. Radiology. 2013;267:837–842. doi: 10.1148/radiol.13121936. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.De Zordo T, Lill SR, Fink C, Feuchtner GM, Jaschke W, Bellmann-Weiler R, et al. Real-time sonoelastography of lateral epicondylitis: Comparison of findings between patients and healthy volunteers. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193:180–185. doi: 10.2214/AJR.08.2020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Lee MH, Cha JG, Jin W, Kim BS, Park JS, Lee HK, et al. Utility of sonographic measurement of the common tensor tendon in patients with lateral epicondylitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196:1363–1367. doi: 10.2214/AJR.10.5769. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Samir AE, Allegretti AS, Zhu Q, Dhyani M, Anvari A, Sullivan DA, et al. Shear wave elastography in chronic kidney disease: A pilot experience in native kidneys. BMC Nephrol. 2015;16:119. doi: 10.1186/s12882-015-0120-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Yerli H, Eski E, Korucuk E, Kaskati T, Agildere AM. Sonoelastographic qualitative analysis for management of salivary gland masses. J Ultrasound Med. 2012;31:1083–1089. doi: 10.7863/jum.2012.31.7.1083. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Klintworth N, Mantsopoulos K, Zenk J, Psychogios G, Iro H, Bozzato A. Sonoelastography of parotid gland tumours: initial experience and identification of characteristic patterns. Eur Radiol. 2012;22(5):947–956. doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2344-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Ultrasonography are provided here courtesy of Polish Ultrasound Society

RESOURCES