AIM: To evaluate, whether image fusion of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with CT or MRI affects the diagnosis and characterization of liver lesions or the therapeutic strategy of surgical or interventional procedures compared to the preliminary diagnosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a retrospective study the image fusion scans of CEUS with contrast enhanced CT or MRI of 100 patients (71 male, mean age 59 years, 0.3-85 years) with benign or malignant liver lesions were evaluated. Fundamental B-scan, color Doppler imaging and CEUS were performed in all patients by an experienced examiner using a multifrequency convex transducer (1-5 MHz, LOGIQ 9/GE) and volume navigation (Vnav). After a bolus injections of up to 2.4 ml SonoVue® (BRACCO, Italy) digital raw data was stored as cine-loops up to 5 min. In 74 patients, CEUS was fused with a pre-existing ceCT, in 26 patients a ceMRI was used. RESULTS: In all 100 patients (100%) the image quality in all modalities (ceCT, ceMRI and CEUS) was excellent or with only minor diagnostic limitations. Regarding the number of lesions revealed in image fusion of CEUS/ceCT/ceMRI and the preceding diagnostic method, concordant results were found in 84 patients. In 12 patients, additional lesions were found using fusion imaging causing subsequently a change of the therapeutical strategy. In 15 out of 21 patients with either concordant or discordant results regarding the number of lesions, image fusion allowed a definite diagnosis due to a continuous documentation of the microcirculation of the tumor and its contrast enhancement. A significant coherency (p < 0.05) among image fusion with either ceCT or ceMRI and CEUS and a subsequent change of therapeutic strategy was found. CONCLUSION: Image fusion with volume navigation (VNav) of CEUS with ceCT or ceMRI frequently allows a definite localization and diagnosis of hepatic lesions in patients with primary hepatic carcinoma or metastatic diseases. This might cause a change of the therapeutic strategy in many patients with hepatic lesions.
AIM: To evaluate, whether image fusion of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with CT or MRI affects the diagnosis and characterization of liver lesions or the therapeutic strategy of surgical or interventional procedures compared to the preliminary diagnosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a retrospective study the image fusion scans of CEUS with contrast enhanced CT or MRI of 100 patients (71 male, mean age 59 years, 0.3-85 years) with benign or malignant liver lesions were evaluated. Fundamental B-scan, color Doppler imaging and CEUS were performed in all patients by an experienced examiner using a multifrequency convex transducer (1-5 MHz, LOGIQ 9/GE) and volume navigation (Vnav). After a bolus injections of up to 2.4 ml SonoVue® (BRACCO, Italy) digital raw data was stored as cine-loops up to 5 min. In 74 patients, CEUS was fused with a pre-existing ceCT, in 26 patients a ceMRI was used. RESULTS: In all 100 patients (100%) the image quality in all modalities (ceCT, ceMRI and CEUS) was excellent or with only minor diagnostic limitations. Regarding the number of lesions revealed in image fusion of CEUS/ceCT/ceMRI and the preceding diagnostic method, concordant results were found in 84 patients. In 12 patients, additional lesions were found using fusion imaging causing subsequently a change of the therapeutical strategy. In 15 out of 21 patients with either concordant or discordant results regarding the number of lesions, image fusion allowed a definite diagnosis due to a continuous documentation of the microcirculation of the tumor and its contrast enhancement. A significant coherency (p < 0.05) among image fusion with either ceCT or ceMRI and CEUS and a subsequent change of therapeutic strategy was found. CONCLUSION: Image fusion with volume navigation (VNav) of CEUS with ceCT or ceMRI frequently allows a definite localization and diagnosis of hepatic lesions in patients with primary hepatic carcinoma or metastatic diseases. This might cause a change of the therapeutic strategy in many patients with hepatic lesions.
Authors: Vasileios Rafailidis; Annamaria Deganello; Tom Watson; Paul S Sidhu; Maria E Sellars Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2016-09-26 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Heike E Daldrup-Link; Christina Sammet; Marta Hernanz-Schulman; Katherine A Barsness; Anne Marie Cahill; Ellen Chung; Andrea S Doria; Kassa Darge; Rajesh Krishnamurthy; Matthew P Lungren; Sheila Moore; Laura Olivieri; Ashok Panigrahy; Alexander J Towbin; Andrew Trout; Stephan Voss Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2016-02-02 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Victoria Sherwood; John Civale; Ian Rivens; David J Collins; Martin O Leach; Gail R ter Haar Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Cheng Fang; Sudha A Anupindi; Susan J Back; Doris Franke; Thomas G Green; Zoltan Harkanyi; Jörg Jüngert; Jeannie K Kwon; Harriet J Paltiel; Judy H Squires; Vassil N Zefov; M Beth McCarville Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2021-05-12