Contrast enhanced ultrasound for the evaluation of focal liver lesions in daily practice. A multicentre study

Medical Ultrasonography

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 95-100

  Sporea, Ioan ^a   Badea, Radu ^b   Martie, Alina ^a   Dumitru, Eugen ^c   Ioanitescu, Simona ^d   Sirli, Roxana ^a   Socaciu, Mihai ^b   Popescu, Alina ^a   Danila, Mirela ^a   Voiculescu, Mihai ^d  

^a VICTOR BABES UNIVERSITY OF MEDICINE AND PHARMACY   (Romania)

^b IULIU HATIEGANU UNIVERSITY OF MEDICINE AND PHARMACY   (Romania)

^c Faculty of Medicine Constanta   (Romania)

^d CAROL DAVILA UNIVERSITY OF MEDICINE AND PHARMACY   (Romania)

Author keywords

Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound; Focal liver lesions; Multicentre study

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; SONOVUE;

ARTICLE; BENIGN TUMOR; BILE DUCT CARCINOMA; BOLUS INJECTION; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CHRONIC LIVER DISEASE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCED ULTRASOUND; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; ECHOGRAPHY; FATTY LIVER; FOCAL LIVER LESION; HEPATOBLASTOMA; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LIVER ABSCESS; LIVER ADENOMA; LIVER BIOPSY; LIVER CELL CARCINOMA; LIVER CYST; LIVER HEMANGIOMA; LIVER HEMATOMA; LIVER INJURY; LIVER METASTASIS; LIVER NODULE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; LIVER NEOPLASMS; MALE; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; PREVALENCE; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ROMANIA; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; ULTRASONOGRAPHY; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

EID: 84867942855     PISSN: 18444172     EISSN: 20668643     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Albrecht T, Blomley M, Bolondi L, et al. for the EFSUMB Study Group. Guidelines for the use of contrast agents in ultrasound. Ultraschall Med 2004;25:249-256.
2. Claudon M, Cosgrove D, Albrecht T, et al. Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Update 2008. Ultraschall Med 2008;29:28-44.
3. Strobel D, Seitz K, Blank W, et al. Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound for the Characterization of Focal Liver Lesions-Diagnostic Accuracy in Clinical Practice (DEGUM multicenter trial). Ultraschall Med 2008;29:499-505.
4. Tranquart F, Le Gouge A, Correas JM, et al. Role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the blinded assessment of fo cal lesions in comparison with MDCT and CEMRI: Results from a multicentre clinical trial. EJC 2008;suppl.6:9-15.
5. Seitz K, Strobel D, Bernatik T, et al. Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) for the characterization of focal liver lesions - prospective comparison in clinical practice: CEUS vs. CT (DEGUM multicenter trial). Ultraschall Med 2009;30:383-389
6. Seitz K, Bernatik T, Strobel D, et al. Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) for the Characterization of Focal Liver Lesions in Clinical Practice (DEGUM Multicenter Trial): CEUS vs. MRI - a Prospective Comparison in 269 Patients. Ultraschall Med 2010;31:492-499.
7. Sirli R, Sporea I, Martie A, Popescu A, Danila M. Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound in focal liver lesions - a cost efficiency study. Med Ultrason 2010;12:280-285.
8. Romanini L, Passamonti M, Aiani L, et al. Economic assessment of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for evaluation of focal liver lesions: a multicentre Italian experience. Eur Radiol 2007;17 Suppl 6:F99-F106.
9. Sporea I, Sirli R, Martie A, Popescu A, Danila M. How useful is Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound for the characterization of Focal Liver Lesions? J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2010; 19:393-398.
10. Sporea I, Badea R, Martie A, et al. Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound for the characterization of focal liver lesions. Med Ultrason 2011;13:38-44.
11. Wang WP, Wu Y, Luo Y, et al. Clinical value of contrastenhanced ultrasonography in the characterization of focal liver lesions: a prospective multicenter trial. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 2009;4:370-376.
12. Trillaud H, Bruel JM, Valette PJ, et al. Characterization of focal liver lesions with SonoVue®- enhanced sonography: International multicenter-study in comparison to CT and MRI. World J Gastroenterol 2009;15:3748-3756.
13. Granito A, Galassi M, Piscalia F, et al. Impact of Gadoxetic Acid (GD-EOB-DTPA)-Enhaced Magnetic Resonance on the non-invasive diagnosis of small hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2011;S386:A968.
14. Trillaud H, Bruel JM, Valette PJ, et al. Characterization of focal liver lesions with SonoVue®- enhanced sonography: International multicenter-study in comparison to CT and MRI. World J Gastroenterol 2009;15:3748-3756.
15. Quaia E, Calliada F, Bertolotto, 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.
16. Strobel D, Seitz K, Blank W, et al. Tumor-specific vascularization pattern of liver metastasis, hepatocellular carcinoma, hemangioma and focal nodular hyperplasia in the differential diagnosis of 1,349 liver lesions in contrastenhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Ultraschall Med 2009;30:376-378.
17. Tranquart F, Correas JM, Ladam Marcus V, et al. Echographie de contraste temps reel dans la prise en charge diagnostique des lesions nodulaires hepatiques: evaluation des performances diagnostiques et de l'impact economique sur une etude multicentrique francaise. J Radiol 2009;90:109-122.
18. Giesel FL, Delorme S, Sibbel R, Kauczor HU, Krix M. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the characterization of incidental liver lesions - an economical evaluation in comparison with multi-phase computed tomography. Ultraschall Med. 2009;30:259-268.