Yan Ling Wen1,2, Masatoshi Kudo1, Kiyoshi Maekawa3, Yasunori Minami1, Hobyung Chung1, Yoichiro Suetomi1, Hirokazu Onda1, Masayuki Kitano1, Toshihiko Kawasaki1. 1. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kinki University School of Medicine, 377-2, Ohno-Higashi, 589-8511, Osaka-Sayama, Japan. 2. Department of Ultrasound, Sun Yat-Sen University of Medical Science Memorial Hospital, 107 Yanjiangxi Rd, 510120, Guangzhou, China. 3. Abdominal Ultrasound Unit, Kinki University School of Medicine, 377-2, Ohno-Higashi, 589-8511, Osaka-Sayama, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the usefulness of contrast advanced dynamic flow imaging and contrast pulse subtraction imaging in the intranodular hemodynamics of hepatic tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten patients underwent contrast advanced dynamic flow imaging and contrast pulse subtraction imaging using Levovist(®), a microbubble contrast agent. Fourteen hepatic tumor nodules were studied: 9 were hepatocellular carcinoma, 1 metastasis, 1 hemangioma, 1 adenomatous hyperplasia, and 2 metastatic lymph nodes of hepatocellular carcinoma. Real-time scanning of contrast advanced dynamic flow imaging and intermittent interval-delay scanning of contrast pulse subtraction imaging were carried out in the early arterial phase, the late vascular phase, and the postvascular phase. The results obtained from contrast advanced dynamic flow imaging and contrast pulse subtraction imaging were compared with those obtained by precontrast power Doppler imaging and three-phase dynamic CT, respectively. RESULTS: The rate of detection of intranodular vascularity by contrast advanced dynamic flow imaging (93%) or contrast pulse subtraction imaging (93%) was significantly higher than that of precontrast power Doppler imaging (29%) and was as high as that of dynamic CT. Characteristic intranodular hemodynamics were detected in hepatocellular carcinoma, metastasis, hemangioma, and adenomatous hyperplasia with typical appearance of an intranodular blood vessel image in the early arterial phase, a parenchymal stain image in the late vascular phase, and a perfusion defect image in the post-vascular phase. CONCLUSION: Contrast advanced dynamic flow imaging and contrast pulse subtraction imaging clearly show the intranodular hemodynamics in hepatic tumors.
PURPOSE: To investigate the usefulness of contrast advanced dynamic flow imaging and contrast pulse subtraction imaging in the intranodular hemodynamics of hepatic tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten patients underwent contrast advanced dynamic flow imaging and contrast pulse subtraction imaging using Levovist(®), a microbubble contrast agent. Fourteen hepatic tumor nodules were studied: 9 were hepatocellular carcinoma, 1 metastasis, 1 hemangioma, 1 adenomatous hyperplasia, and 2 metastatic lymph nodes of hepatocellular carcinoma. Real-time scanning of contrast advanced dynamic flow imaging and intermittent interval-delay scanning of contrast pulse subtraction imaging were carried out in the early arterial phase, the late vascular phase, and the postvascular phase. The results obtained from contrast advanced dynamic flow imaging and contrast pulse subtraction imaging were compared with those obtained by precontrast power Doppler imaging and three-phase dynamic CT, respectively. RESULTS: The rate of detection of intranodular vascularity by contrast advanced dynamic flow imaging (93%) or contrast pulse subtraction imaging (93%) was significantly higher than that of precontrast power Doppler imaging (29%) and was as high as that of dynamic CT. Characteristic intranodular hemodynamics were detected in hepatocellular carcinoma, metastasis, hemangioma, and adenomatous hyperplasia with typical appearance of an intranodular blood vessel image in the early arterial phase, a parenchymal stain image in the late vascular phase, and a perfusion defect image in the post-vascular phase. CONCLUSION: Contrast advanced dynamic flow imaging and contrast pulse subtraction imaging clearly show the intranodular hemodynamics in hepatic tumors.
Authors: T Albrecht; C W Hoffmann; S A Schmitz; S Schettler; A Overberg; C T Germer; K J Wolf Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: K Numata; K Tanaka; T Kiba; S Saito; M Ikeda; K Hara; N Tanaka; M Morimoto; S Iwase; H Sekihara Journal: J Ultrasound Med Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 2.153