PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic benefit of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the differential diagnosis of liver tumors in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From May 2004 to December 2006 1349 patients (male 677, female 672) with a hepatic tumor lacking a definite diagnosis based on B-mode ultrasound and power Doppler ultrasound were examined at 14 hospitals by contrast-enhanced ultrasound using a standardized protocol (pulse/phase inversion imaging, mechanical index < 0.4). The Tumor status was assessed based on the vascularity pattern and contrast enhancement seen in focal lesions during the arterial, portal, and late phase. The diagnosis established after contrast-enhanced ultrasound was compared to histology (> 75% cases) or in some cases to CT or MRI. RESULTS: The final diagnosis of hepatic tumors included 573 benign hepatic tumors (hemangiomas n = 242, focal nodular hyperplasia n = 170, hepatocellular adenoma n = 19, other benign lesions n = 142) and 755 malignant hepatic tumors (metastases n = 383, hepatocellular carcinoma n = 279, other malignant lesions n= 93). The overall diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in comparison to the correct final diagnosis based on the combined gold standard was 90.3%. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound was able to correctly assess 723/755 malignant lesions (sensitivity 95.8%) and 476/573 benign lesions (specificity 83.1%). The positive predictive value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the diagnosis of a malignant tumor was 95.4% and the negative predictive value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound was 95.7%. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound clearly improves the differential diagnosis of hepatic tumors and is very helpful in clinical practice when B-scan or power Doppler morphological criteria are missing.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic benefit of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the differential diagnosis of liver tumors in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From May 2004 to December 2006 1349 patients (male 677, female 672) with a hepatic tumor lacking a definite diagnosis based on B-mode ultrasound and power Doppler ultrasound were examined at 14 hospitals by contrast-enhanced ultrasound using a standardized protocol (pulse/phase inversion imaging, mechanical index < 0.4). The Tumor status was assessed based on the vascularity pattern and contrast enhancement seen in focal lesions during the arterial, portal, and late phase. The diagnosis established after contrast-enhanced ultrasound was compared to histology (> 75% cases) or in some cases to CT or MRI. RESULTS: The final diagnosis of hepatic tumors included 573 benign hepatic tumors (hemangiomas n = 242, focal nodular hyperplasia n = 170, hepatocellular adenoma n = 19, other benign lesions n = 142) and 755 malignant hepatic tumors (metastases n = 383, hepatocellular carcinoma n = 279, other malignant lesions n= 93). The overall diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in comparison to the correct final diagnosis based on the combined gold standard was 90.3%. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound was able to correctly assess 723/755 malignant lesions (sensitivity 95.8%) and 476/573 benign lesions (specificity 83.1%). The positive predictive value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the diagnosis of a malignant tumor was 95.4% and the negative predictive value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound was 95.7%. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound clearly improves the differential diagnosis of hepatic tumors and is very helpful in clinical practice when B-scan or power Doppler morphological criteria are missing.
Authors: Johann Le Floc'h; Aimen Zlitni; Holly A Bilton; Melissa Yin; Arash Farhadi; Nancy R Janzen; Mikhail G Shapiro; John F Valliant; F Stuart Foster Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 3.488