Searching for just a few words should be enough to get started. If you need to make more complex queries, use the tips below to guide you.
Article type: Research Article
Authors: Zheng, Shu-Guang; | Xu, Hui-Xiong; | Liu, Lin-Na | Wang, Yan | Zhang, Yi-Feng | Guo, Le-Hang | Liu, Chang | Xu, Jun-Mei | Sun, Li-Ping | Wu, Jian
Affiliations: Department of Medical Ultrasound, Tenth People's Hospital of Tongji University, Shanghai, China | Department of Medical Ultrasonics, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China
Note: [] Shu-Guang Zheng and Lin-Na Liu contributed to this work equally. Corresponding author: Shu-Guang Zheng, Department of Medical Ultrasound, Tenth People's Hospital of Tongji University, No.301, Yanchangzhong Road, Shanghai 200072, China. E-mail: xuhuixiong@hotmail.com
Note: [] Shu-Guang Zheng and Lin-Na Liu contributed to this work equally.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether parametric imaging with contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is equal to experienced radiologists after review of CEUS in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH). METHODS: An image processing software was used to quantitatively analyze the CEUS clips of 30 HCCs (mean diameter, 3.4 ± 0.9 cm; range, 1.8–5.0 cm) and 30 FNHs (mean diameter, 3.0 ± 1.1 cm; range, 1.1–5.0 cm). Low mechanical index contrast specific imaging modes and contrast agent of SonoVue® were applied for CEUS. Fourteen HCCs were pathologically diagnosed and 16 were clinically diagnosed, whereas all the FNHs were confirmed by pathological examination. Quantitative parameters of HCC and FNH were compared. The diagnostic performance between parametric imaging and two experienced readers was compared using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: On parametric imaging, the rise time, time to peak and mean transit time for HCC and FNH were 16.7 ± 11.1 s vs. 21.9 ± 9.0 s (P = 0.052), 29.9 ± 14.1 s vs. 33.2 ± 11.1 s (P = 0.322), 115.0 ± 90.9 s vs. 271.5 ± 147.6 s (P < 0.001), respectively. The ROC analysis showed that, for the differentiation between HCC and FNH, the cut-off point for mTT was 107.93 s with the Az value of 0.817 (95% CI: 0.703–0.931), and the Az value was 0.834 (95%CI: 0.728–0.941) for two experienced readers (P = 0.417 compared with mTT). The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were 96.7%, 66.7%, 81.7%, 74.4%, and 95.2%, respectively, for parametric imaging, and 86.7%, 76.7%, 81.7%, 78.8%, and 85.2%, respectively, for two experienced readers (all P > 0.05 compared with parametric imaging). CONCLUSION: Parametric imaging with CEUS is helpful for characterization the typical dynamic effects of microvascularization of HCC and FHH and is equal to experienced readers in the differential diagnosis between HCC and FNH.
Keywords: Parametric imaging, contrast-enhanced ultrasound, differential diagnosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, focal nodular hyperplasia
DOI: 10.3233/CH-121652
Journal: Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 375-389, 2013
IOS Press, Inc.
6751 Tepper Drive
Clifton, VA 20124
USA
Tel: +1 703 830 6300
Fax: +1 703 830 2300
sales@iospress.com
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
IOS Press
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 688 3355
Fax: +31 20 687 0091
info@iospress.nl
For editorial issues, permissions, book requests, submissions and proceedings, contact the Amsterdam office info@iospress.nl
Inspirees International (China Office)
Ciyunsi Beili 207(CapitaLand), Bld 1, 7-901
100025, Beijing
China
Free service line: 400 661 8717
Fax: +86 10 8446 7947
china@iospress.cn
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
如果您在出版方面需要帮助或有任何建, 件至: editorial@iospress.nl