Value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in assessing the vascularity of liver metastases comparison with contrast-enhanced computed tomography

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine

Volumn 29, Issue 10, 2010, Pages 1403-1410

  Zheng, Yan Ling ^a   Yin, Xiao Yu ^a   Xie, Xiao Yan ^a   Xu, Hui Xiong ^a   Xu, Zuo Feng ^a   Liu, Guang Jian ^a   Liang, Jin Yu ^a   Lu, Ming De ^a  

^a SUN YAT SEN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Contrast enhanced ultrasonography; Contrastenhanced computed tomography; Liver metastases; Vascularity

Indexed keywords

COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; PATHOLOGY; TOMOGRAPHY;

COLON CARCINOMA; CONTRAST-ENHANCED; CONTRAST-ENHANCED ULTRASONOGRAPHY; LIVER METASTASIS; PANCREATIC CARCINOMA; VASCULARITY;

ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

CONTRAST AGENT BR1; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; PHOSPHOLIPID; SULFUR HEXAFLUORIDE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COLON TUMOR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; ECHOGRAPHY; ENDOSCOPIC ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; LIVER TUMOR; MALE; METASTASIS; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PANCREAS TUMOR; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; RECTUM TUMOR; VASCULARIZATION;

ADULT; AGED; COLONIC NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LIVER NEOPLASMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PANCREATIC NEOPLASMS; PHOSPHOLIPIDS; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RECTAL NEOPLASMS; SULFUR HEXAFLUORIDE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, INTERVENTIONAL;

EID: 77958184958     PISSN: 02784297     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7863/jum.2010.29.10.1403     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Braga L, Semelka RC, Pietrobon R, Martin D, de Barros N, Guller U. Does hypervascularity of liver metastases as detected on MRI predict disease progression in breast cancer patients? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182:1207-1213.
2. Taniai N, Onda M, Tajiri T, et al. Good embolization response for colorectal liver metastases with hypervascularity. Hepatogastroenterology 2002; 49:1531-1534.
3. Alba E, Valls C, Dominguez J, et al. Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma on the waiting list for orthotopic liver transplantation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 190:1341-1348.
4. Krix M, Kiessling F, Essig M, et al. Low mechanical index contrast-enhanced ultrasound better reflects high arterial perfusion of liver metastases than arterial phase computed tomography. Invest Radiol 2004; 39:216-222.
5. Singh J, Daftary A. lodinated contrast media and their adverse reactions. J Nucl Med Technol 2008; 36:69-74.
6. Bhayana D, Kim TK, Jang HJ, Burns PN, Wilson SR. Hypervascular liver masses on contrast-enhanced ultrasound: the importance of washout. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 194:977-983.
7. Schneider M. SonoVue, a new ultrasound contrast agent. Eur Radiol 1999; 9(suppl 3):S347-S348.
8. Quaia E, Calliada F, Bertolotto M, et al. Characterization of focal liver lesions with contrast-specific US modes and a sulfur hexafluoride-filled microbubble contrast agent: diagnostic performance and confidence. Radiology 2004; 232:420-430.
9. Albrecht T, Blomley M, Bolondi L, et al; EFSUMB Study Group. Guidelines for the use of contrast agents in ultrasound: January 2004. Ultraschall Med 2004; 25:249-256.
10. Xu HX, Liu GJ, Lu MD, et al. Characterization of focal liver lesions using contrast-enhanced sonography with a low mechanical index mode and a sulfur hexafluoride-filled microbubble contrast agent. J Clin Ultrasound 2006; 34: 261-272.
11. Nino-Murcia M, Olcott EW, Jeffrey RB Jr, Lamm RL, Beaulieu CF, Jain KA. Focal liver lesions: pattern-based classification scheme for enhancement at arterial phase CT. Radiology 2000; 215:746-751.
12. Kanematsu M, Kondo H, Goshima S, et al. Imaging liver metastases: review and update. Eur J Radiol 2006; 58:217-228.
13. 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.
14. Dietrich CF. Characterisation of focal liver lesions with contrast enhanced ultrasonography. Eur J Radiol 2004; 51(suppl):S9-S17.
15. von Herbay A, Vogt C, Willers R, Häussinger D. Real-time imaging with the sonographic contrast agent SonoVue: differentiation between benign and malignant hepatic lesions. J Ultrasound Med 2004; 23:1557-1568. (Pubitemid 39586861)
16. Park Y, Choi D, Lim HK, et al. Growth rate of new hepatocellular carcinoma after percutaneous radiofrequency ablation: evaluation with multiphase CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 191:215-220.