AIM: To investigate intra-operator variability of semi-quantitative perfusion parameters using dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (DCE-US), following bolus injections of SonoVue(®). METHODS: The in vitro experiments were conducted using three in-house sets up based on pumping a fluid through a phantom placed in a water tank. In the in vivo experiments, B16F10 melanoma cells were xenografted to five nude mice. Both in vitro and in vivo, images were acquired following bolus injections of the ultrasound contrast agent SonoVue(®) (Bracco, Milan, Italy) and using a Toshiba Aplio(®) ultrasound scanner connected to a 2.9-5.8 MHz linear transducer (PZT, PLT 604AT probe) (Toshiba, Japan) allowing harmonic imaging ("Vascular Recognition Imaging") involving linear raw data. A mathematical model based on the dye-dilution theory was developed by the Gustave Roussy Institute, Villejuif, France and used to evaluate seven perfusion parameters from time-intensity curves. Intra-operator variability analyses were based on determining perfusion parameter coefficients of variation (CV). RESULTS: In vitro, different volumes of SonoVue(®) were tested with the three phantoms: intra-operator variability was found to range from 2.33% to 23.72%. In vivo, experiments were performed on tumor tissues and perfusion parameters exhibited values ranging from 1.48% to 29.97%. In addition, the area under the curve (AUC) and the area under the wash-out (AUWO) were two of the parameters of great interest since throughout in vitro and in vivo experiments their variability was lower than 15.79%. CONCLUSION: AUC and AUWO appear to be the most reliable parameters for assessing tumor perfusion using DCE-US as they exhibited the lowest CV values.
AIM: To investigate intra-operator variability of semi-quantitative perfusion parameters using dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (DCE-US), following bolus injections of SonoVue(®). METHODS: The in vitro experiments were conducted using three in-house sets up based on pumping a fluid through a phantom placed in a water tank. In the in vivo experiments, B16F10 melanoma cells were xenografted to five nude mice. Both in vitro and in vivo, images were acquired following bolus injections of the ultrasound contrast agent SonoVue(®) (Bracco, Milan, Italy) and using a Toshiba Aplio(®) ultrasound scanner connected to a 2.9-5.8 MHz linear transducer (PZT, PLT 604AT probe) (Toshiba, Japan) allowing harmonic imaging ("Vascular Recognition Imaging") involving linear raw data. A mathematical model based on the dye-dilution theory was developed by the Gustave Roussy Institute, Villejuif, France and used to evaluate seven perfusion parameters from time-intensity curves. Intra-operator variability analyses were based on determining perfusion parameter coefficients of variation (CV). RESULTS: In vitro, different volumes of SonoVue(®) were tested with the three phantoms: intra-operator variability was found to range from 2.33% to 23.72%. In vivo, experiments were performed on tumor tissues and perfusion parameters exhibited values ranging from 1.48% to 29.97%. In addition, the area under the curve (AUC) and the area under the wash-out (AUWO) were two of the parameters of great interest since throughout in vitro and in vivo experiments their variability was lower than 15.79%. CONCLUSION: AUC and AUWO appear to be the most reliable parameters for assessing tumor perfusion using DCE-US as they exhibited the lowest CV values.
Entities:
Keywords:
Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasonography; Functional imaging; Intra-operator variability; Linear raw data; Quantification; Semi-quantitative perfusion parameters
Authors: Sergio Casciaro; Christian Demitri; Francesco Conversano; Ernesto Casciaro; Alessandro Distante Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2007-08-01 Impact factor: 3.896
Authors: Chaan S Ng; David L Raunig; Edward F Jackson; Edward A Ashton; Frederick Kelcz; Kevin B Kim; Razelle Kurzrock; Teresa M McShane Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Edoardo Vicenzini; Roberto Delfini; Francesca Magri; Francesco Puccinelli; Marta Altieri; Antonio Santoro; Maria Fabrizia Giannoni; Luigi Bozzao; Vittorio Di Piero; Gian Luigi Lenzi Journal: J Ultrasound Med Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Christopher G Willett; Yves Boucher; Emmanuelle di Tomaso; Dan G Duda; Lance L Munn; Ricky T Tong; Daniel C Chung; Dushyant V Sahani; Sanjeeva P Kalva; Sergey V Kozin; Mari Mino; Kenneth S Cohen; David T Scadden; Alan C Hartford; Alan J Fischman; Jeffrey W Clark; David P Ryan; Andrew X Zhu; Lawrence S Blaszkowsky; Helen X Chen; Paul C Shellito; Gregory Y Lauwers; Rakesh K Jain Journal: Nat Med Date: 2004-01-25 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Zühre Uz; Lucinda Shen; Dan M J Milstein; Krijn P van Lienden; Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg; Can Ince; Thomas M van Gulik Journal: Eur Surg Res Date: 2020-07-13 Impact factor: 1.745
Authors: Marcus Stangeland; Trond Engjom; Martin Mezl; Radovan Jirik; Odd Helge Gilja; Georg Dimcevski; Kim Nylund Journal: Ultrasound Int Open Date: 2017-09-12