Literature DB >> 32749211

Contrast-enhanced US with Sulfur Hexafluoride and Perfluorobutane for the Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Individuals with High Risk.

Hyo-Jin Kang1, Jeong Min Lee1, Jeong Hee Yoon1, Kyoungbun Lee1, Haeryoung Kim1, Joon Koo Han1.   

Abstract

Background Perfluorobutane (PFB) and sulfur hexafluoride (SHF) have different physiologic characteristics, but it is unclear whether hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) show similar wash-in and washout patterns to both contrast agents at US. Purpose To investigate Contrast-Enhanced US Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2017 HCC categorization by comparing PFB-enhanced US and SHF-enhanced US in participants at high risk for HCC. Materials and Methods In this prospective study conducted from February to August 2019, participants at high risk for HCC with treatment-naive hepatic observations (≥1 cm) categorized as LR-3, LR-4, LR-5, or LR-M (intermediate probability of HCC, probable HCC, definitely HCC, and probably malignant but not HCC specific, respectively) on cross-sectional images were screened. They underwent same-day PFB-enhanced US and SHF-enhanced US. Arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE), washout time and degree, and echogenicity in the Kupffer phase (PFB-enhanced US) were evaluated and categorized by the operator using CEUS LI-RADS, who referred to the radiologist who performed the contrast-enhanced US, and by a reviewer. Diagnostic performance was analyzed using the McNemar test. Results Fifty-nine participants were evaluated (43 with HCC, 10 with non-HCC malignancies, six with benign findings). Nonrim APHE was identically observed in 95% (41 of 43, operator) or 88% (38 of 43, reviewer) of HCCs with both contrast agents. Among 43 HCCs, late (≥60 seconds) and mild washout were more frequent with PFB-enhanced US (34 with operator, 33 with reviewer) than with SHF-enhanced US (24 with operator, 26 with reviewer) (P = .04 or P = .12). The washout time for HCCs was later at PFB-enhanced US (median, 101 seconds ± 11) than at SHF-enhanced US (median, 84 seconds ± 5; P = .04). Sensitivity (34 of 43; 79%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 64%, 90%) was higher with PFB-enhanced US than with SHF-enhanced US (23 of 43; 54%; 95% CI: 38%, 67%; P = .01). Specificity was 100% (95% CI: 79%, 100%) with both. Hypoenhancement in the Kupffer phase was more common in malignant (49 of 53 [92%] for both operator and reviewer) than in benign (two of six [33%] for operator, one of six [16%] for reviewer) lesions. Conclusion On the basis of the Contrast-Enhanced US Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2017 algorithm, noninvasive US diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma by using perfluorobutane-enhanced US had higher diagnostic performance than sulfur hexafluoride-enhanced US, without loss of specificity. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Kim and Jang in this issue.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32749211     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2020200115

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  7 in total

1.  Inter-reader reliability of contrast-enhanced ultrasound Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ji Hun Kang; Sang Hyun Choi; Ji Sung Lee; Dong Wook Kim; Jong Keon Jang
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-06-22

2.  Diagnostic criteria of perfluorobutane-enhanced ultrasonography for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma in high-risk individuals: how is late washout determined?

Authors:  Hyo-Jin Kang; Jung Hoon Kim; Jeongin Yoo; Joon Koo Han
Journal:  Ultrasonography       Date:  2021-12-17

3.  Performance Evaluation of Multiple Ultrasonographical Methods for the Detection of Primary Sjögren's Syndrome.

Authors:  Shihao Xu; Jing Luo; Chengwei Zhu; Jiachun Jiang; Hui Cheng; Ping Wang; Jingwei Hong; Jinxia Fang; Jingjing Pan; Matthew A Brown; Xiaochun Zhu; Xiaobing Wang
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2021-11-22       Impact factor: 7.561

4.  Discrepancy of contrast-enhanced ultrasonographic pattern with two contrast agents in steatohepatitic subtype hepatocellular carcinoma: A case report.

Authors:  Jiang Bo; Kong BeiNing; Fei Xiang; Wan XinKun; Luo YuKun
Journal:  Radiol Case Rep       Date:  2022-04-05

Review 5.  Imaging diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: Future directions with special emphasis on hepatobiliary magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasound.

Authors:  Junghoan Park; Jeong Min Lee; Tae-Hyung Kim; Jeong Hee Yoon
Journal:  Clin Mol Hepatol       Date:  2021-12-27

6.  Noninvasive Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma on Sonazoid-Enhanced US: Value of the Kupffer Phase.

Authors:  Hiroshi Takahashi; Katsutoshi Sugimoto; Naohisa Kamiyama; Kentaro Sakamaki; Tatsuya Kakegawa; Takuya Wada; Yusuke Tomita; Masakazu Abe; Yu Yoshimasu; Hirohito Takeuchi; Takao Itoi
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-07

7.  Prospective assessment of diagnostic efficacy and safety of SonazoidTM and SonoVue® ultrasound contrast agents in patients with focal liver lesions.

Authors:  Ke Lv; Hongyan Zhai; Yuxin Jiang; Ping Liang; Hui-Xiong Xu; Lianfang Du; Yi-Hong Chou; Xiaoyan Xie; YuKun Luo; Young Joon Lee; Jae Young Lee; Bing Hu; Baoming Luo; Yi Wang; Ying Luan; Christina Kalli; Kun Chen; Wenping Wang; Ja-Der Liang
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-06-16
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.