Review of clinical characteristics and applications of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in dogs

Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

Volumn 234, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 460-470

  Haers, Hendrik ^a   Saunders, Jimmy H ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL DISEASE; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; DOG; DOG DISEASE; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PATHOLOGY; REFERENCE VALUE; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARD;

ANIMALS; CONTRAST MEDIA; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; DOG DISEASES; DOGS; FEMALE; MALE; REFERENCE VALUES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

CANIS FAMILIARIS;

EID: 62149151028     PISSN: 00031488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2460/javma.234.4.460     Document Type: Review

References (94)

1. Cachard C, Finet G, Bouakaz A, et al. Ultrasound contrast agent in intravascular echography: an in vitro study. Ultrasound Med Biol 1997;23:705-717.
2. Forsberg F, Basude R, Liu J-B, et al. Effect of filling gases on the backscatter from contrast microbubbles: theory and in vivo measurements. Ultrasound Med Biol 1999;25:1203-1211.
3. Shi WT, Forsberg F, Bautista R, et al. Image enhancement by acoustic conditioning of ultrasound contrast agents. Ultrasound Med Biol 2004;30:191-198.
4. Calliada F, Campani R, Bottinelli O, et al. Ultrasound contrast agents: basic principles. Eur J Radiol 1998;27(suppl 2):S157- S160.
5. Wilson SR, Burns PN. Liver mass evaluation with ultrasound: the impact of microbubble contrast agents and pulse inversion imaging. Semin Liver Dis 2001;21:147-159.
6. Correas JM, Bridal L, Lesavre A, et al. Ultrasound contrast agents: properties, principles of action, tolerance, and artifacts. Eur Radiol 2001,11:1316-1328.
7. Fischer G, Rak R, Sackmann M. Improved investigation of portal-hepatic veins by echo-enhanced Doppler sonography. Ultrasound Med Biol 1998;24:1345-1349.
8. Droste DW, Kaps M, Navabi DG, et al. Ultrasound contrast en-hancing agents in neurosonology: principles, methods, future possibilities. Acta Neurol Scand 2000;102:1-10.
9. Forsberg F, Piccoli CW, Liu J-B, et al. Hepatic tumor detection: MR imaging and conventional US versus pulse-inversion harmonic US of NC100100 during its reticuloendothelial system- specific phase. Radiology 2002;222:824-829.
10. de Jong N, Frinking PJ, Bouakaz A, et al. Detection procedures of ultrasound contrast agents. Ultrasonics 2000;38:87-92.
11. Ziegler L, O'Brien RT. Harmonic ultrasound: a review. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2002;43:501-509.
12. Bloch SH, Dayton PA, Ferrara KW. Targeted imaging using ultrasound contrast agents. Progess and opportunities for clinical and research applications. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 2004; 23:18-29.
13. Cosgrove D. Angiogenesis imaging-ultrasound. Br JRadiol 2003; 76:S43-S49.
14. Maresca G, Summaria V, Colagrande C, et al. New prospects for ultrasound contrast agents. Eur J Radiol 1998;27(suppl 2): S171-S178.
15. Albrecht T, Hohmann J. Contrast agents in sonography. Toshiba VISIONS 2004;6:3-25.
16. Robbin ML, Lockhart ME, Barr RG. Renal imaging with ultrasound contrast: current status. Radiol Clin North Am 2003; 41:963-978.
17. Whittingham TA. Contrast-specific imaging techniques: technical perspective. In: Quaia E, ed. Contrast media in ultrasonography: basic principles and clinical applications. Berlin: Springer- Verlag Inc, 2005;58-62.
18. Eckersley RJ, Chin CT, Burns PN. Optimising phase and amplitude modulation schemes for imaging microbubble contrast agents at low acoustic power. Ultrasound Med Biol 2005;31:213- 219.
19. Simpson DH, Ting Chin C, Burns PN. Pulse inversion Dop- pler: a new method for detecting nonlinear echoes from microbubble contrast agents. Ferroelectr Freq Control 1999;46: 372-382.
20. Shankar PM, Krishna PD, Newhouse VL. Advantages of subhar- monic over second harmonic backscatter for contrast-to-tissue echo enhancement. Ultrasound Med Biol 1998;24:395-399.
21. Borsboom JM, Chin CT, de jong N. Nonlinear coded excitation method for ultrasound contrast imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol 2003;29:277-284.
22. Bahr A, Wrigley R, Salman M. Quantitative evaluation of ima- gent as an abdominal ultrasound contrast medium in dogs. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2000;41:50-55.
23. O'Brien RT, lani M, Matheson J, et al. Contrast harmonic ultrasound of spontaneous liver nodules in 32 dogs. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2004;45:547-553.
24. Ziegler LE, O'Brien RT, Waller KR, et al. Quantitative contrast harmonic ultrasound imaging of normal canine liver. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2003;44:451-454.
25. O'Brien RT. Improved detection of metastatic hepatic heman- giosarcoma nodules with contrast ultrasound in three dogs. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2007;48:146-148.
26. Ohlerth S, Rüefli E, Poirier V, et al. Contrast harmonic imaging of the normal canine spleen. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2007;48:451- 456.
27. Waller KR, O'Brien RT, Zagzebski JA. Quantitative contrast ultrasound analysis of renal perfusion in normal dogs. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2007;48:373-377.
28. Taylor GA, Ecklund K, Dunning PS. Renal cortical perfusion in rabbits: visualisation with color amplitude imaging and an experimental microbubble-based US contrast agent. Radiology 1996;201:125-129.
29. Salwei RM, O'Brien RT, Matheson JS. Characterisation of lympho- matous lymph nodes in dogs using contrast harmonic and Power Doppler ultrasound. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2005;46:411-416.
30. Scharz M, Ohlerth S, Achermann R, et al. Evaluation of quantified contrast-enhanced color and power Doppler ultrasonography for the assessment of vascularity and perfusion of naturally occurring tumors in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2005;66:21-29.
31. Salwei RM, O'Brien RT, Matheson JS. Use of contrast harmonic ultrasound for the diagnosis of congenital portosystemic shunts in three dogs. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2003;44:301-305.
32. Wilson SR, Burns PN, Muradali D, et al. Harmonic hepatic US with microbubble contrast agent: initial experience showing improved characterization of hemangioma, hepatocellular carcinoma, and metastasis. Radiology 2000;215:153-161.
33. Dietrich CE Characterisation of focal liver lesions with contrast enhanced ultrasonography. Eur J Radiol 2004;51S:S9-S17.
34. EFSUMB Study Group. Guidelines for the use of contrast agents in ultrasound. Ultraschall Med 2004;25:249-256.
35. Bergman JR. Nodular hyperplasia in the liver of the dog: an association with changes in the Ito cell population. Vet Pathol 1985;22:427-438.
36. Patnaik AK, Hurvitz Al, Lieberman PH. Canine hepatic neoplasms: a clinicopathologic study. Vet Pathol 1980;17:553-564.
37. Nyland TG, Mattoon JS, Herrgesell EJ, et al. Liver. In: Nyland TG, Mattoon JS, eds. Small animal diagnostic ultrasound. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co, 2002;93-127.
38. Dietrich CF, Ignee A, Trojan J, et al. Improved characterisation of histologically proven liver tumours by contrast enhanced ultrasonography during the portal venous and specific late phase of SHU 508A. Gut 2004;53:401-405.
39. Bryant TH, Blomley MJ, Albrecht T, et al. Improved characterization of liver lesions with liver-phase uptake of liver-specific microbubbles: prospective multicenter study. Radiology 2004;232:799-809.
40. von Herbay A, Vogt C, Willers R, et al. Real-time imaging with the sonographic contrast agent SonoVue; differentiation between benign and malignant hepatic lesions. J Ultrasound Med 2004;23:1557-1568.
41. Cohen M, Bohling MW, Wright JC, et al. Evaluation of sensitivity and specificity of cytologic examination: 269 cases (1999- 2000). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003;222:964-967.
42. Wang KY, Panciera DL, Al-Rukibat RK, et al. Accuracy of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of the liver and cytologic findings in dogs and cats: 97 cases (1990-2000). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2004;224:75-78.
43. Brannigan M, Burns PN, Wilson SR. Blood flow patterns in focal liver lesions at microbubble-enhanced US. Radiographics 2004;24:921-935.
44. Nyman HT, Kristensen AT, Flagstad A, et al. A review of the sonographic assessment of tumor metastases in liver and superficial lymph nodes. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2004;45:438-448.
45. Nyman HT, Kristensen AT, Kjelgaard-Hansen M, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in normal canine liver. Evaluation of imaging and safety parameters. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2005;46:243-250.
46. Oldenburg A, Hohmann J, Foert E, et al. Detection of hepatic metastases with low MI real time contrast enhanced sonography and SonoVue. Ultraschall Med 2005;26:277-284.
47. Blomley MJK, Albrecht T, Cosgrove DO, et al. Improved imaging of liver metastases with stimulated acoustic emission in the late phase of enhancement with the US contrast agent SH U 508A: early experience. Radiology 1999;210:409-416.
48. Harvey CJ, Blomley MJK, Eckersley RJ, et al. Hepatic malignancies: improved detection with Pulse-Inversion US in late phase of enhancement with SHU 508A. Early experience. Radiology 2000;216:903-908.
49. Burns PN, Wilson SR. Focal liver masses: enhancement patterns on contrast-enhanced images-concordance of US scans with CT scans and MR images. Radiology 2007;242:162-174.
50. Quaia E, Palumbo A. Contrast-specific imaging techniques: methodological point of view. In: Quaia E, ed. Contrast media in ultrasonography: basic principles and clinical applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag Inc, 2005;71-75.
51. Buergelt CD. Nodular splenic disease in dogs. Vet Med (Praha) 2001;96:766-773.
52. Feeney DA, Johnston GR, Hardy RM. Two-dimensional, grayscale ultrasonography for assessment of hepatic and splenic neoplasia in the dog and cat. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1984;184:68- 81.
53. Wrigley RH, Park RD, Konde LJ, et al. Ultrasonographic features of splenic hemangiosarcoma in dogs: 18 cases (1980-1986). J Am Vet Med Assoc 1988;192:1113-1117.
54. Ballegeer EA, Forrest LJ, Dickinson RM, et al. Correlation of ultrasonographic appearance of lesions and cytologic and histologic diagnoses in splenic aspirates from dogs and cats: 32 cases (2002-2005). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2007;230:690-696.
55. Catalano O, Sandomenico F, Matarazzo 1, et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography of the spleen. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184:1150-1156.
56. Harvey CJ, Lim AKP, Lynch M, et al. Applications of ultrasound microbubbles in the spleen. In: Quaia E, ed. Contrast media in ultrasonography: basic principles and clinical applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag Inc, 2005;205-217.
57. D'Onofrio M, Zamboni G, Tognolini A, et al. Mass-forming pancreatitis: value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. World J Gastroenterol 2006;12:4181-4184.
58. D'Onofrio M, Martone E, Malagò R, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography of the pancreas. JOP 2007;8(suppl 1)71-76.
59. Kitano M, Kudo M, Maekawa K, et al. Dynamic imaging of pancreatic diseases by contrast enhanced coded phase inversion harmonic ultrasonography. Gut 2004;53:854-859.
60. Yang W, Chen MH, Yan K, et al. Differential diagnosis of nonfunctional islet cell tumor and pancreatic carcinoma with sonography. Eur J Radiol 2007;62:342-351.
61. Abildgaard A, Klow NE, Jakobsen JA, et al. Effect of ultrasound contrast medium in color Doppler and power Doppler visualisation of blood flow in canine kidneys. Acta Radiol 1997;38:445- 453.
62. Thorelius L. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for extrahepatic lesions: preliminary experience. Eur J Radiol 2004;(suppl 51): S31-S38.
63. Nyman HT, Kristensen AT, Skovgaard IM, et al. Characterization of normal and abnormal canine superficial lymph nodes using gray-scale B-mode, color flow mapping, power, and spectral Doppler ultrasonography: a multivariate study. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2005;46:404-410.
64. Schroeder RJ, Maerurer J, Gath HJ, et al. Vascularization of reactively enlarged lymph nodes analyzed by color duplex sonography.) Oral Maxillofac Surg 1999;57:1090-1095.
65. Goldberg BB, Merton DA, Liu J-B, et al. Sentinel lymph nodes in a swine model with melanoma: contrast-enhanced lymphatic US. Radiology 2004;230:727-734.
66. Wisner ER, Ferrara KW, Short RE, et al. Sentinel node detection using contrast-enhanced power Doppler ultrasound lymphography. Invest Radiol 2003;38:358-365.
67. Maruyama H, Matsutani S, Saisho H, et al. Real-time blood-pool images of contrast enhanced ultrasound with Definity in the detection of tumour nodules in the liver. Br J Radiol 2005;78:512- 518.
68. Schmid V, Lang J. Intravascular ultrasound contrast media. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 1995;36:307-314.
69. Blomley MJ, Albrecht T, Cosgrove DO, et al. Liver vascular transit time analyzed with dynamic hepatic venography with bolus injections of an US contrast agent: early experience in seven patients with metastases (Erratum published in Radiology 1998;210:882). Radiology 1998;209:862-866.
70. Lefevre F, Correas JM, Briangon S, et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography of the renal transplant using triggered pulse-inversion imaging: preliminary results. Ultrasound Med Biol 2002;28:303-314.
71. Okada M, Hoffmann CW, Wolf KJ, et al. Bolus versus continuous infusion of microbubble contrast agent for liver US: initial experience. Radiology 2005;237:1063-1067.
72. Caruso G, Salvaggio G, Sorrentino F, et al. Cerebral vessels. In: Quaia E, ed. Contrast media in ultrasonography: basic principles and clinical applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag Inc, 2005;92.
73. Bang N, Nielsen MB, Rasmussen AN, et al. Hepatic vein transit time of an ultrasound contrast agent: simplified procedure using pulse inversion imaging. Br J Radiol 2001;74:752-755.
74. Schwarz KQ, Chen X, Bezante GP, et al. The Doppler kinetics of microbubble echo contrast. Ultrasound Med Biol 1996;22:453- 462.
75. Krix M, Kiessling F, Vosseler S, et al. Comparison of intermittent-bolus contrast imaging with conventional power Doppler sonography: quantification of tumour perfusion in small animals. Ultrasound Med Biol 2003;29:1093-1103.
76. Orden MR, Jurvelin JS, Kirkinen PR Kinetics of a US contrast agent in benign and malignant adnexal tumors. Radiology 2003;226:405-410.
77. Gebel M, Caselitz M, Bowen-Davies PE, et al. A multicenter, prospective, open label, randomized, controlled phase 111b study of SHU 508A (Levovist) for Doppler signal enhancement in the portal vascular system. Ultraschall Med 1998;19:148-156.
78. Blomley MJK, Cooke JC, Unger EC, et al. Microbubble contrast agents; a new era in ultrasound. BMJ 2001;322:1222-1225.
79. Ricci P, Laghi A, Cantisani V, et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography with SonoVue: enhancement patterns of benign focal liver lesions and correlation with dynamic gadobenate dimeglumine- enhanced MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;184:821-827.
80. Oudkerk M, Torres CG, Song B, et al. Characterization of liver lesions with mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced MR imaging: multicenter study comparing MR and dual-phase spiral CT. Radiology 2002;223:517-524.
81. Albrecht T, Blomley MJ, Burns PN, et al. Improved detection of hepatic metastases with pulse-inversion US during the liver-specific phase of SHU 508A: multicenter study. Radiology 2003;227:361-370.
82. Quaia E, D'Onofrio M, Palumbo A, et al. Comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography versus baseline ultrasound and contrast-enhanced computed tomography in metastatic disease of the liver: diagnostic performance and confidence. Eur Radiol 2006;16:1599-1609.
83. Albrecht T, Hoffmann CW, Schmitz SA, et al. Phase-inversion sonography during the liver-specific late phase of contrast enhancement: improved detection of liver metastases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176:1191-1198.
84. Lee JM, Youk JH, Lee YH, et al. Detection of hepatic VX2 tumors in rabbits: comparison of conventional US and phase-inversion harmonic US during the liver-specific late phase of contrast enhancement. Korean J Radiol 2003;4:124-129.
85. Quaia E, D'Onofrio M, Bartolotta TV, et al. Characterzation of focal liver lesions. In: Quaia E, ed. Contrast media in ultrasonography: basic principles and clinical applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag Inc, 2005;126-127.
86. Jakobsen JA, Oyen R, Thomsen HS, et al. Safety of ultrasound contrast agents. Eur Radiol 2005;15:941-945.
87. US FDA Web site. Micro-bubble contrast agents (marketed as Definity (perflutren lipid microspheres) injectable suspension and Optison (perflutren protein-type A microspheres for injection). FDA Alert (10/2007). Available at: www.fda.gov/cder/drug/infopage/microbubble/default.htm. Accessed May 10, 2008.
88. Lim AK, Patel N, Eckersley RJ, et al. Evidence for spleen-specific uptake of a microbubble contrast agent: a quantitative study in healthy volunteers. Radiology 2004;231:785-788.
89. Blomley M. Can microbubbles be targeted to lymph nodes? Radiology 2004;231:611-612.
90. Forsberg F, Merton DA, Liu J-B, et al. Clinical applications of ultrasound contrast agents. Ultrasonics 1998;36:695-701.
91. Lindner JR. Molecular imaging with contrast ultrasound and targeted microbubbles. J Nucl Cardiol 2004;11:215-221.
92. Dijkmans PA, Juffermans LJ, Musters RJ, et al. Microbubbles and ultrasound: from diagnosis to therapy. Eur J Echocardiogr 2004;5:245-256.
93. Hauff P, Reinhardt M.Briel A, et al. Molecular targeting of lymph nodes with L-selectin ligand-specific US contrast agent: a feasibility study in mice and dogs. Radiology 2004;231:667-673.
94. Martin MJ, Chung EM, Goodall AH, et al. Enhanced detection of thromboemboli with the use of targeted microbubbles. Stroke 2007;38:2726-2732.