Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: What is the evidence and what are the obstacles?

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 193, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 55-60

  Wilson, Stephanie R ^a   Greenbaum, Lennard D ^b   Goldberg, Barry B ^c  

^a FOOTHILLS HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b Winnie Palmer Hospital for Women and Babies   (United States)

^c THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Contrast media; Contrast enhanced ultrasound; FDA approval; Radiology practice guidelines; Ultrasound contrast agents

Indexed keywords

ECHO CONTRAST MEDIUM; FLUOROCARBON; PERFLUTREN; CONTRAST MEDIUM;

BREAST DISEASE; CANCER RISK; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HEMANGIOMA; HUMAN; IONIZING RADIATION; KIDNEY DISEASE; LIVER ADENOMA; LIVER CELL CARCINOMA; METASTASIS; MICROBUBBLE; NEPHROTOXICITY; NODULAR HYPERPLASIA; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OVARY DISEASE; PANCREAS DISEASE; PATIENT MONITORING; PATIENT SAFETY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE DISEASE; PULMONARY HYPERTENSION; RADIODIAGNOSIS; RADIOLOGICAL TECHNOLOGIST; REIMBURSEMENT; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPLEEN DISEASE; TISSUE PERFUSION; ULTRASOUND; CHEMICALLY INDUCED DISORDER; ECHOGRAPHY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; METHODOLOGY; RISK ASSESSMENT;

CONTRAST MEDIA; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; KIDNEY DISEASES; RISK ASSESSMENT; ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

EID: 67650341228     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.09.2553     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Wilson SR, Jang HJ, Kim TK, Iijima H, Kamiyama N, Burns PN. Real-time temporal maximum-intensity-projection imaging of hepatic lesions with contrast-enhanced sonography. AJR 2008; 190:691-695 (Pubitemid 351304513)
2. Main ML, Ryan AC, Davis TE, Albano MP, Kusnetzky LL, Hibberd M. Acute mortality in hospitalized patients undergoing echocardiography with and without an ultrasound contrast agent (multicenter registry results in 4,300,966 consecutive patients). Am J Cardiol 2008; 102:1742-1746
3. Piscaglia F, Bolondi L. The safety of SonoVue in abdominal applications: retrospective analysis of 23,188 investigations. Ultrasound Med Biol 2006; 32:1369-1375 (Pubitemid 44332662)
4. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography: an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:2277-2284 (Pubitemid 350190758)
5. Leen E, Ceccotti P, Kalogeropoulou C, Angerson WJ, Moug SJ, Horgan PG. Prospective multicenter trial evaluating a novel method of characterizing focal liver lesions using contrast-enhanced sonography. AJR 2006; 186:1551-1559 (Pubitemid 46112517)
6. Ding H, Wang WP, Huang BJ. Imaging of focal liver lesions low-mechanical-index real-time ultrasonography with SonoVue. J Ultrasound Med 2005; 24:285-297 (Pubitemid 40315955)
7. Quaia E, Degobbis F, Tona G, Mosconi E, Bertolotto M, Pozzi Mucelli R. Differential patterns of contrast enhancement in different focal liver lesions after injection of the microbubble US contrast agent SonoVue [in English and Italian]. Radiol Med 2004; 107:155-165 (Pubitemid 38478134)
8. Wilson SR, Jang HJ, Kim TK, Burns PN. Diagnosis of focal liver masses on ultrasonography: comparison of unenhanced and contrast-enhanced scans. J Ultrasound Med 2007; 26:775-787; quiz, 788-790 (Pubitemid 46870345)
9. Wilson SR, Burns PN. An algorithm for the diagnosis of focal liver masses using microbubble contrast-enhanced pulse-inversion sonography. AJR 2006; 186:1401-1412 (Pubitemid 46115735)
10. Jang HJ, Kim TK, Burns PN, Wilson SR. Enhancement patterns of hepatocellular carcinoma at contrast-enhanced US: comparison with histologic differentiation. Radiology 2007; 244:898-906 (Pubitemid 47292103)
11. Nicolau C, Catala V, Vilana R, et al. Evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma using SonoVue, a second generation ultrasound contrast agent: correlation with cellular differentiation. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:1092-1099 (Pubitemid 38787254)
12. Kim TK, Jang HJ, Burns PN, Murphy-Lavallee J, Wilson SR. Focal nodular hyperplasia and hepatic adenoma: differentiation with low-mechanical-index contrast-enhanced sonography. AJR 2008; 190:58-66
13. Ungermann L, Elias P, Zizka J, Ryska P, Klzo L. Focal nodular hyperplasia: spoke-wheel arterial pattern and other signs on dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. Eur J Radiol 2007; 63:290-294 (Pubitemid 47239265)
14. Yen YH, Wang JH, Lu SN, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonographic spoke-wheel sign in hepatic focal nodular hyperplasia. Eur J Radiol 2006; 60:439-444 (Pubitemid 44779067)
15. Dietrich CF, Schuessler G, Trojan J, Fellbaum C, Ignee A. Differentiation of focal nodular hyperplasia and hepatocellular adenoma by contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Br J Radiol 2005; 78:704-707 (Pubitemid 41122683)
16. Murphy-Lavallee J, Jang HJ, Kim TK, Burns PN, Wilson SR. Are metastases really hypovascular in the arterial phase? The perspective based on contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med 2007; 26:1545-1556
17. Quaia E, D'Onofrio M, Palumbo A, Rossi S, Bruni S, Cova M. 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 (Pubitemid 43871833)
18. Leen E, Ceccotti P, Moug SJ, et al. Potential value of contrast-enhanced intraoperative ultrasonography during partial hepatectomy for metastases: an essential investigation before resection? Ann Surg 2006; 243:236-240 (Pubitemid 43185443)
19. 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 (Pubitemid 36514748)
20. Weskott HP. Emerging roles for contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 2008; 40:51-71
21. Robbin ML, Lockhart ME, Barr RG. Renal imaging with ultrasound contrast: current status. Radiol Clin North Am 2003; 41:963-978 (Pubitemid 37152086)
22. Correas JM, Claudon M, Tranquart F, Hélénon O. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography: renal applications [in French]. J Radiol 2003; 84(12 Pt 2):2041-2054 (Pubitemid 38235015)
23. Fleischer AC, Lyshchik A, Jones HW Jr, et al. Contrast-enhanced transvaginal sonography of benign versus malignant ovarian masses: preliminary findings. J Ultrasound Med 2008; 27:1011-1018; quiz, 1019-1021 (Pubitemid 351991174)
24. Granada JF, Feinstein SB. Imaging of the vasa vasorum. Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med 2008; 5[suppl 2]:S18-S25
25. Coli S, Magnoni M, Sangiorgi G, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging of intraplaque neovascularization in carotid arteries: correlation with histology and plaque echogenicity. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 52:223-230 (Pubitemid 351915779)
26. Goldberg BB, Merton DA, Liu JB, Murphy G, Forsberg F. Contrast-enhanced sonographic imaging of lymphatic channels and sentinel lymph nodes. J Ultrasound Med 2005; 24:953-965 (Pubitemid 40885182)
27. Dill-Macky MJ, Wilson SR, Sternbach Y, Kachura J, Lindsay T. Detecting endoleaks in aortic endografts using contrast-enhanced sonography. AJR 2007; 188:830; [web]W262-W268
28. Tombesi P, Catellani M, Abbasciano V, Sartori S, Tassinari D. Impact of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in a tertiary clinical practice. J Ultrasound Med 2008; 27:991-992 (Pubitemid 351913842)
29. Lanka B, Jang HJ, Kim TK, Burns PN, Wilson SR. Impact of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in a tertiary clinical practice. J Ultrasound Med 2007; 26:1703-1714 (Pubitemid 350210078)
30. Greenbaum L, Burns P, Copel J, et al.; American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine recommendations for contrast-enhanced liver ultrasound imaging clinical trials. J Ultrasound Med 2007; 26:705-716
31. U.S. Food and Drug Administration Website. MedWatch: The FDA Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program. Detailed view: safety labeling changes approved by FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. www.fda.gov/medwatch/safety/2007/oct07.htm#Definity. Published October 2007. Revised July 31, 2008. Accessed April 16, 2009
32. Main ML, Goldman JH, Grayburn PA. Thinking outside the "box": the ultrasound contrast controversy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50:2434-2437
33. Keen CE. Ultrasound contrast advocates take aim at FDA black box warning. www.auntminnie.com/index.asp?Sec=sup&Sub=ult&Pag=dis&ItemId= 79499&d=1. Published January 3, 2008. Updated March 7, 2008. Accessed April 16, 2009
34. U.S. Food and Drug Administration Website. FDA alert: information for healthcare professionals - Micro-bubble contrast agents (marketed as Definity [perflutren lipid microsphere] injectable suspension and Optison [perflutren protein-type A microspheres for injection]). www.fda.gov/cder/drug/InfoSheets/ HCP/microbubbleHCP.htm. Published October 12, 2007. Updated July 17, 2008. Accessed April 16, 2009
35. Kim TY, Jang HJ, Wilson SR. Microbubble contrast agents for ultrasound imaging: safety and efficacy in abdominal and vascular imaging. US Radiol 2008; 1:54-57