Characterization of focal liver lesions with contrast-specific US modes and a sulfur hexafluoride-filled microbubble contrast agent: diagnostic performance and confidence.

PURPOSE To assess whether characterization of solid focal liver lesions could be improved by using ultrasonographic (US) contrast-specific modes after sulfur hexafluoride-filled microbubble contrast agent injection, as compared with lesion characterization achieved with preliminary baseline US. MATERIALS AND METHODS Four hundred fifty-two solid focal hepatic lesions that were considered indeterminate at baseline gray-scale and color Doppler US were examined after microbubble contrast agent injection performed by using low-acoustic-power contrast-specific modes during the arterial (10-40 seconds after injection), portal venous (50-90 seconds after injection), and late (100-300 seconds after injection) phases. Two readers independently and retrospectively reviewed baseline and contrast material-enhanced US scans and classified each depicted lesion as malignant or benign according to standard diagnostic criteria. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values and areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (Az) were calculated by considering histologic analysis (317 patients) or contrast-enhanced helical computed tomography followed by serial US 3-6 months apart (135 patients) as the reference standards. RESULTS Different contrast enhancement patterns were observed according to lesion characteristics. During the late phase, benign lesions were predominantly hyper- or isoechoic relative to the adjacent liver parenchyma, whereas malignant lesions were predominantly hypoechoic. Review of the contrast-enhanced US scans after baseline image review yielded significantly improved diagnostic performance (P <.05). Overall diagnostic accuracy was 49% before versus 85% after review of the contrast-enhanced scan for reader 1 and 51% before versus 88% after review of the contrast-enhanced scan for reader 2. Diagnostic confidence-that is, the Az-was 0.820 before versus 0.968 after review of the contrast-enhanced scan for reader 1 and 0.831 before versus 0.978 after review of the contrast-enhanced scan for reader 2. CONCLUSION The use of contrast-specific modes with a sulfur hexafluoride contrast agent led to improved characterization of solid focal liver lesions.

[1]  Thomas Albrecht,et al.  Stimulated acoustic emission in liver parenchyma with Levovist , 1998, The Lancet.

[2]  N. Hosten,et al.  Contrast‐enhanced power Doppler sonography: Improved detection of characteristic flow patterns in focal liver lesions , 1999, Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU.

[3]  J. Tsai,et al.  Hepatic focal nodular hyperplasia: findings on color Doppler ultrasound , 1997, Abdominal Imaging.

[4]  C. Reinhold,et al.  Characterization of focal hepatic lesions with duplex sonography: findings in 198 patients. , 1995, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[5]  D. Machin,et al.  Medical Statistics: A Commonsense Approach , 1993 .

[6]  A. Rahmouni,et al.  Hepatocellular adenoma: color Doppler US and pathologic correlations. , 1994, Radiology.

[7]  P. Burns,et al.  Focal hepatic masses: enhancement patterns with SH U 508A and pulse-inversion US. , 2002, Radiology.

[8]  Michel Claudon,et al.  Ultrasound contrast agents: properties, principles of action, tolerance, and artifacts , 2001, European Radiology.

[9]  J R Beck,et al.  The use of relative operating characteristic (ROC) curves in test performance evaluation. , 1986, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[10]  L. Dalla Palma,et al.  Characterization of unifocal liver lesions with pulse inversion harmonic imaging after Levovist injection: preliminary results , 2000, European Radiology.

[11]  C F Beaulieu,et al.  Focal liver lesions: pattern-based classification scheme for enhancement at arterial phase CT. , 2000, Radiology.

[12]  B. I. Choi,et al.  Limitations of characterization of hepatic hemangiomas using a sonographic contrast agent (Levovist) and power Doppler ultrasonography. , 1999, Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

[13]  Feng Yan,et al.  BR1: A New Ultrasonographic Contrast Agent Based on Sulfur Hexafluoride-Filled Microbubbles , 1995, Investigative radiology.

[14]  H. Nawata,et al.  Hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma. , 2001, Journal of clinical gastroenterology.

[15]  B. Choi,et al.  Hepatic tumors: contrast agent-enhancement patterns with pulse-inversion harmonic US. , 2000, Radiology.

[16]  J. Correas,et al.  Infusion versus bolus of an ultrasound contrast agent: in vivo dose-response measurements of BR1. , 2000, Investigative radiology.

[17]  N. Rofsky,et al.  Dysplastic nodules and hepatocellular carcinoma: thin-section MR imaging of explanted cirrhotic livers with pathologic correlation. , 1996, Radiology.

[18]  M. Federle,et al.  Focal nodular hyperplasia: CT findings with emphasis on multiphasic helical CT in 78 patients. , 2001, Radiology.

[19]  Y H Auh,et al.  Color Doppler flow imaging of hepatocellular carcinomas. Comparison with metastatic tumors and hemangiomas by three-step grading for color hues. , 1996, Clinical imaging.

[20]  D O Cosgrove,et al.  Do different types of liver lesions differ in their uptake of the microbubble contrast agent SH U 508A in the late liver phase? Early experience. , 2001, Radiology.

[21]  H. Bismuth,et al.  Surgical anatomy and anatomical surgery of the liver , 2005, World Journal of Surgery.

[22]  O. Matsui,et al.  Progression to hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma: correlation with intranodular blood supply evaluated with CT during intraarterial injection of contrast material. , 2002, Radiology.

[23]  J. Hanley,et al.  A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. , 1983, Radiology.

[24]  G. Marchal,et al.  Focal liver lesions: evaluation of the efficacy of gadobenate dimeglumine in MR imaging--a multicenter phase III clinical study. , 2000, Radiology.

[25]  J. Llull,et al.  Human pharmacokinetics and safety evaluation of SonoVue, a new contrast agent for ultrasound imaging. , 2000, Investigative radiology.

[26]  Emilio Quaia,et al.  US characterization of focal hepatic lesions with intermittent high-acoustic-power mode and contrast material. , 2003, Academic radiology.

[27]  P. Burns,et al.  Pulse inversion imaging of liver blood flow: improved method for characterizing focal masses with microbubble contrast. , 2000, Investigative radiology.

[28]  E. Longchampt,et al.  Accuracy of Cytology vs. Microbiopsy for the Diagnosis of Well-Differentiated Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Macroregenerative Nodule , 2000, Acta Cytologica.

[29]  G. Morana,et al.  Focal nodular hyperplasia: morphologic and functional information from MR imaging with gadobenate dimeglumine. , 2001, Radiology.

[30]  Sachiko Tanaka,et al.  Dynamic sonography of hepatic tumors. , 2001, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[31]  S. Hussain,et al.  Benign versus malignant hepatic nodules: MR imaging findings with pathologic correlation. , 2002, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[32]  P. Burns,et al.  Harmonic hepatic US with microbubble contrast agent: initial experience showing improved characterization of hemangioma, hepatocellular carcinoma, and metastasis. , 2000, Radiology.