| Literature DB >> 30095086 |
Xiaoyan Niu1, Wenbin Jiang1, Xiaojuan Zhang1, Zhaoyan Ding1, Hongwei Xue2, Zhenguang Wang3, Cheng Zhao1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study aimed to assess the value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the diagnosis and prognosis of lymphoma based on PET-CT. MATERIAL AND METHODS Our study included 88 superficial lymph nodes and 63 patients who underwent ultrasound-guided biopsy or surgery for pathology from October 2015 to March 2017. All lymph nodes were assessed by CEUS and PET-CT. CEUS and PET-CT parameters were recorded, including arrive time (AT), time to peak (TTP), base intensity (BI), peak intensity (PI), ascending slope (AS), descending slope (DS), area under the TIC curve (AUC), maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), and mean standardized uptake value (SUVmean). Pearson's correlation was used to assess the associations of CEUS and PET-CT parameters. RESULTS Of the 88 lymph nodes examined,12 were Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) and76 were non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). The variations of CEUS dose parameters (ΔI, AUC, and AS) were positively correlated with PET-CT results (SUVmax and TLG). Correlation coefficients were 0.609, 0.518, 0.456, 0.630, 0.593, and 0. 532, respectively. The remaining time values (AT, TP, and ΔT) were negatively associated with PET-CT results. Correlation coefficients were -0.239, -0.272, -0.284and -0.377, -0.391, and -0.320, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Quantitative CEUS data were correlated with PET-CT values, with potential use in the diagnosis of lymphoma.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30095086 PMCID: PMC6098669 DOI: 10.12659/MSM.908849
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit ISSN: 1234-1010
Characteristics of the contrast-enhanced US enhancement parameters and PET/CT SUVmax.
| Characteristic | Range | Mean ± standard deviation |
|---|---|---|
| AT (arrive time) | 6.0~19.0 | 13.39±3.06 |
| TTP (time to peak) | 10.0~25.0 | 19.05±3.49 |
| ΔT | 3.0~8.0 | 5.68±1.13 |
| BI (base time) | −70~−43 | −56.17±5.56 |
| PI (peak intensity) | −55~−28 | −40.57±5.28 |
| ΔI | 10~21 | 15.63±1.96 |
| AS (ascending slope) | 1.43~5.25 | 2.89±0.84 |
| DS (descending slope) | 0.2~2.4 | 0.69±0.49 |
| Area under curve of TIC | 144.10~1063.81 | 478.37±210.08 |
| SUVmax | 2.1~25.2 | 7.44±6.15 |
| SUVmean | 0.6~17.0 | 4.72±4.10 |
| MTV | 0.25~59.52 | 12.30±14.91 |
| TLG | 0.4~510.87 | 74.67±115.58 |
Qualitative results of CEUS.
| Pathological type | CEUS | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enhanced intensity | Enhanced degree | Enhanced pattern | Boundary | ||||||
| Intense | Moderate | Weak | Homogeneous | Hetero-Geneous | Central | Centrifugal | Clear | Unclear | |
| HL | 10 | 2 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 2 | 10 | 12 | 0 |
| DLBL | 28 | 12 | 0 | 32 | 8 | 10 | 30 | 34 | 6 |
| FL | 12 | 0 | 2 | 13 | 1 | 0 | 14 | 13 | 0 |
| NK/TCL | 4 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 | 0 |
| ML | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 0 |
| ALBCL | 6 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 |
| TLL | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 0 |
| PTL | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
Relationship between contrast-enhanced US parameters and PET/CT values in all patients with lymphoma.
| CEUS parameters | SUVmax | TLG | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| P Values | Pearson’s correlation coefficients | P values | Pearson’s correlation coefficients | |
| AT | 0.025 | −0.239 | 0.000 | −0.377 |
| TTP | 0.010 | −0.272 | 0.000 | −0.391 |
| ΔT | 0.007 | −0.284 | 0.002 | −0.320 |
| BI | 0.259 | −0.122 | 0.056 | −0.205 |
| PI | 0.359 | 0.099 | 0.861 | 0.019 |
| ΔI | 0.000 | 0.609 | 0.000 | 0.630 |
| AS | 0.456 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.532 |
| DS | 0.563 | −0.062 | 0.893 | −0.015 |
| AUC of TIC | 0.000 | 0.518 | 0.000 | 0.593 |
Relationship between contrast-enhanced US parameters and PET/CT values in patients with different types of lymphoma.
| Type of lymphoma | CEUS parameters | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||||
| AT (r,P) | TP (r,P) | ΔT (r,P) | BI (r,P) | TI (r,P) | ΔI (r,P) | AUC (r,P) | AS (r,P) | DS (r,P) | |
| Early (compare with SUVmax) | −0.343 | −0.431 | −0.270 | −0.062 | 0.092 | 0.566 | 0.491 | 0.456 | −0.151 |
| 0.178 | 0.084 | 0.294 | 0.814 | 0.726 | 0.018 | 0.045 | 0.066 | 0.564 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Early (compare with TLG) | −0.422 | −0.517 | −0.289 | −0.316 | 0.116 | 0.768 | 0.609 | 0.497 | 0.040 |
| 0.092 | 0.034 | 0.261 | 0.216 | 0.657 | 0.000 | 0.009 | 0.042 | 0.879 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Advanced (compare with SUVmax) | −0.247 | −0.294 | −0.342 | −0.140 | 0.099 | 0.631 | 0.534 | 0.510 | −0.070 |
| 0.037 | 0.013 | 0.003 | 0.244 | 0.409 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.563 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Advanced (compare with TLG) | −0.376 | −0.386 | −0.327 | −0.186 | 0.042 | 0.609 | 0.591 | 0.531 | −0.039 |
| 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.005 | 0.119 | 0.729 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.745 | |
|
| |||||||||
| HL (compare with SUVmax) | −0.495 | −0.610 | −0.686 | 0.089 | 0.527 | 0.746 | 0.740 | 0.827 | −0.381 |
| 0.102 | 0.035 | 0.014 | 0.783 | 0.079 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.001 | 0.222 | |
|
| |||||||||
| HL (compare with TLG) | −0.392 | −0.527 | −0.670 | −0.136 | 0.264 | 0.660 | 0.801 | 0.764 | −0.195 |
| 0.207 | 0.078 | 0.017 | 0.674 | 0.407 | 0.020 | 0.002 | 0.004 | 0.543 | |
|
| |||||||||
| NHL (compare with SUVmax) | −0.379 | −0.346 | −0.250 | −0.145 | 0.058 | 0.650 | 0.593 | 0.435 | −0.065 |
| 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.030 | 0.211 | 0.618 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.577 | |
|
| |||||||||
| NHL (compare with TLG) | −0.388 | −0.366 | −0.294 | −0.203 | 0.000 | 0.662 | 0.560 | 0.518 | −0.007 |
| 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.010 | 0.079 | 0.998 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.955 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Aggressive (compare with SUVmax) | −0.387 | −0.338 | −0.274 | −0.163 | 0.053 | 0.657 | 0.668 | 0.467 | −0.086 |
| 0.002 | 0.007 | 0.031 | 0.207 | 0.681 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.764 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Aggressive (compare with TLG) | −0.403 | −0.378 | −0.365 | −0.222 | −0.010 | 0.663 | 0.611 | 0.567 | −0.017 |
| 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.004 | 0.083 | 0.939 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.893 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Indolent (compare with SUVmax) | −0.196 | 0.090 | 0.449 | −0.415 | −0.412 | −0.505 | 0.191 | −0.407 | −0.382 |
| 0.502 | 0.759 | 0.107 | 0.140 | 0.143 | 0.066 | 0.513 | 0.149 | 0.177 | |
|
| |||||||||
| Indolent (compare with TLG) | −0.039 | 0.180 | 0.403 | −0.245 | −0.113 | 0.040 | −0.005 | −0.209 | −0.088 |
| 0.894 | 0.538 | 0.154 | 0.399 | 0.700 | 0.893 | 0.985 | 0.473 | 0.764 | |
|
| |||||||||
| B cell (compare with SUVmax) | −0.362 | −0.322 | 0.218 | −0.183 | 0.019 | 0.614 | 0.582 | 0.385 | 0.010 |
| 0.003 | 0.010 | 0.084 | 0.147 | 0.881 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.002 | 0.937 | |
|
| |||||||||
| B cell (compare with TLG) | −0.373 | −0.353 | −0.293 | −0.197 | 0.020 | 0.660 | 0.559 | 0.506 | 0.013 |
| 0.002 | 0.004 | 0.019 | 0.118 | 0.874 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.920 | |
|
| |||||||||
| T cell (compare with SUVmax) | −0.732 | −0.784 | −0.730 | 0.104 | 0.286 | 0.877 | 0.784 | 0.864 | −0.214 |
| 0.007 | 0.003 | 0.007 | 0.747 | 0.367 | 0.000 | 0.004 | 0.000 | 0.505 | |
|
| |||||||||
| T cell (compare with TLG) | −0.806 | −0.780 | −0.582 | −0.287 | −0.121 | 0.769 | 0.680 | 0.698 | 0.011 |
| 0.002 | 0.003 | 0.047 | 0.366 | 0.707 | 0.003 | 0.021 | 0.012 | 0.973 | |
Figure 1Two-dimensional ultrasound image. A large lymph node is seen between the carotid artery and the internal jugular vein. CCA – common carotid asrtery; IJV – internal jugular vein; LN – lymph node
Figure 2Contrast enhancement image. The enhanced pattern of the enlarged lymph node (arrow indicates the enhanced lymph node) is homogeneous and intense. TTP=17 s, ΔI=18.
Figure 3PET/CT image of the same patient. The corresponding enlarged lymph node (the arrow indicates the lymph node with enhanced metabolism) shows increased metabolism and SUVmax=11.2.