Advances in sonographic detection of ovarian cancer: Depiction of tumor neovascularity with microbubbles

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 194, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 343-348

  Fleischer, Arthur C ^a   Lyshchik, Andrej ^a   Andreotti, Rochelle F ^a   Hwang, Misun ^a   Jones III, Howard W ^a   Fishman, David A ^b  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Contrast enhanced sonography; Microbubble; Ovarian cancer; Sonography; Tumor response; Vasculature

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MICROANGIOPATHY; MICROBUBBLE; NEOVASCULARIZATION (PATHOLOGY); OVARY CANCER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; TRANSVAGINAL ECHOGRAPHY;

CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; FLUOROCARBONS; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; NEOVASCULARIZATION, PATHOLOGIC; OVARIAN NEOPLASMS; PHOSPHOLIPIDS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SULFUR HEXAFLUORIDE; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, DOPPLER;

EID: 76149132299     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.09.3446     Document Type: Review

References (11)

1. Orden MR, Jurvelin JS, Kirkinen PP. Kinetics of a US contrast agent in benign and malignant adnexal tumors. Radiology 2003; 226:405-41 0
2. Marret H, Sauget S, Giraudeau B, et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography helps in discrimination of benign from malignant adnexal masses. J Ultrasound Med 2004; 23:1629-1642
3. Testa AC, Ferrandina G, Fruscella E, et al. The use of contrasted transvaginal sonography in the diagnosis of gynecologic diseases: a preliminary study. J Ultrasound Med 2005; 24:1267-1278
4. Fleischer AC, Lyschchik A, Jones HW Jr., et al. Contrast-enhanced transvaginal sonography of benign versus malignant ovarian masses: preliminary findings. J Ultrasound Med 2008; 27:1011-1021
5. Folkman J, Watson K, Ingber D, Hanahan D. Induction of angiogenesis during the transition from hyperplasia to neoplasia. Nature 1989; 339:58-61
6. Tsili AC, Tsampoulas C, Charisiadi A, et al. Adnexal masses: accuracy of detection and differentiation with multidetector computed tomography. Gynecol Oncol 2008; 110:22-31
7. Bazot M, Darai E, Nassar-Slaba J, Lafont C, Thomassin-Naggara I. Value of magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of ovarian tumors: a review. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2008; 32:712-723
8. Risum S, Hogdall C, Loft A, et al. The diagnostic value of PET/CT for primary ovarian cancer: a prospective study. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 105:145-149
9. Valentin L. Use of morphology to characterize and manage common adnexal masses. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2004; 18:71-89
10. Alcazar JL, Rodriguez D. Three-dimensional power Doppler vascular sonographic sampling for predicting ovarian cancer in cystic-solid and solid vascularized masses. J Ultrasound Med 2009; 28: 275-281
11. Petricoin EF, Ardekani AM, Hitt BA, et al. Use of proteomic patterns in serum to identify ovarian cancer. Lancet 2002; 359:572-577