Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/s-0028-1109751
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York
Detection of Hepatic Metastases from Colorectal Cancer: Prospective Evaluation of Gray Scale US Versus SonoVue® Low Mechanical Index Real Time-Enhanced US as Compared with Multidetector-CT or Gd-BOPTA-MRI
Lebermetastasendetektion bei kolorektalen Karzinomen: Prospektive Beurteilung von Grauwert-Sonografie gegenüber SonoVue®-verstärkter Echtzeit-Sonografie mit niedrigem mechanischen Index im Vergleich zu Mulitdetektor-CT oder Gd-BOPTA-MRIPublication History
received: 7.1.2009
accepted: 25.7.2009
Publication Date:
20 April 2010 (online)

Zusammenfassung
Ziel: Der Vergleich von Ultraschall (US), kontrastverstärktem Ultraschall (CEUS) mit niedrigem mechanischem Index und Multidetektor-CT (MDCT) zur Lebermetastasendetektion bei kolorektalen Karzinomen. Material und Methoden: Von Januar bis Juni 2006 wurden 110 Patienten (65 männlich, 45 weiblich) mit Verdacht auf hepatische Filiae bei kolorektalem Karzinom prospektiv mit US, CEUS und MDCT durch 2 unabhängige Untersucher evaluiert. Der intraoperative US (IOUS, n = 45) oder ein Follow-up über mindestens 6 Monate mithilfe von MDCT oder Gadobenate-dimeglumine(Gd-BOPTA)-verstärktem MRI galten als Gold-Standard. Der McNemar-Test wurde angewandt. Ergebnisse: Der Referenz-Standard zeigte 430 Metastasen bei 110 Patienten. In der „Patient-by-patient-Analyse” verbesserte CEUS die Sensitivität des US von 67,4 – 71,6 % auf 93,4 – 95,8 % (p < 0,05). Auf Basis der „Lesion-by-lesion-Analyse” verbesserte CEUS die Sensitivität des US von 60,9 – 64,9 % auf 85,3 – 92,8 % (p < 0,001). Die Spezifität erhöhte sich von 50 – 60 % auf 76,7 – 83,3 %. Zwischen CEUS und MDCT wurden keine signifikanten Unterschiede bezüglich der Sensitivität und der Spezifität gefunden. Der CEUS war signifikant sensitiver als der native US in der Detektion von Metastasen, die kleiner als 1 cm waren (p < 0,001) mit einem Sensitivitätsanstieg von 29,1 – 35 % auf 63,3 – 76,6 % hier fanden sich keine signifikanten Unterschiede im Vergleich zur MDCT (Sensitivität von 73,3 – 75,8 %). Schlussfolgerung: CEUS ist deutlich präziser als nativer US und in hohem Maße vergleichbar mit MDCT zur Detektion von Lebermetastasen bei kolorektalen Karzinomen. Daher sollte die US-Untersuchung bei Patienten mit Verdacht auf hepatische Filiae bei kolorektalem Karzinom immer mit Kontrastverstärkung erfolgen.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare ultrasound (US), low-mechanical index contrast enhanced US (CEUS) and multidetector-CT (MDCT) for the detection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. Methods and Materials: From January to June 2006, 110 patients (65 males, 45 females; mean age 62 years; range 39 – 78) with suspected hepatic lesions from colorectal cancer were prospectively evaluated with US, CEUS and MDCT by two independent readers. Intraoperative ultrasonography (IOUS, n = 45) or a follow-up up for at least 6 months by using MDCT or Gd-BOPTA-enhanced MRI was considered the gold standard. McNemar test was employed. Results: Reference standards revealed 430 metastases in 110 patients. On a patient-by-patients analysis, CEUS improved US sensitivity from 67.4 – 71.6 % to 93.4 – 95.8 % (p < 0.05). On a lesion-by-lesion analysis, CEUS improved the sensitivity of US from 60.9 – 64.9 % to 85.3–92.8 % (p < 0.001). The specificity increased from 50 – 60 % to 76.7 – 83.3 %. No significant differences in sensitivity or specificity between CEUS and MDCT were found. Contrast- enhanced US was significantly more sensitive than baseline US in the detection of metastases smaller than 1 cm (p < 0.001) with an increase in sensitivity from 29.1 – 35 % to 63.3 – 76.6 % no significant statistical difference was identified when compared with MDCT (sensitivity of 73.3 – 75.8 %). Conclusions: CEUS is significantly more accurate than US and highly comparable with MDCT in the detection of liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Therefore, in the evaluation of patients with suspected hepatic metastases from colorectal tumour, US examination must be performed after contrast administration.
Key words
abdomen - ultrasound - CT - MR-imaging - CEUS
References
- 1
McArdle C S, Hole D, Hansell D. et al .
A prospective study of colorectal cancer in the west of Scotland: 10-year follow-up.
Br J Surg.
1990;
77
280-282
MissingFormLabel
- 2
Wernecke K, Rummeny E, Bongartz G. et al .
Detection of hepatic masses in patients with carcinoma: comparative sensitivities
of sonography, CT, and MR imaging.
Am J Roentgenol.
1991;
157
731-739
MissingFormLabel
- 3
Clarke M P, Kane R A, Steele Jr G. et al .
Prospective comparison of preoperative imaging and intraoperative ultrasonography
in the detection of liver tumours.
Surgery.
1989;
106
849-855
MissingFormLabel
- 4
Ohlsson B, Tranberg K G, Lundstedt C. et al .
Detection of hepatic metastases in colorectal cancer: a prospective study of laboratory
and imaging methods.
Eur J Surg.
1993;
159
275-281
MissingFormLabel
- 5
Helmberger T, Rau H, Linke R. et al .
Diagnosis and staging of liver metastases with imaging methods.
Chirurg.
1999;
70
114-122
MissingFormLabel
- 6
Bipat S, Leeuwen M S, Comans E F. et al .
Colorectal liver metastases: CT, MR Imaging, and PET for diagnosis – Meta-analysis.
Radiology.
2005;
237
123-131
MissingFormLabel
- 7
Gehl van H, Bourne M, Grazioli L. et al .
Off site evaluation of liver lesion detection by Gd- BOPTA-enhanced MR Imaging.
Eur Radiol.
2001;
11
187-192
MissingFormLabel
- 8
Albrecht T, Blomley M J, Burn P N. et al .
Improved detection of hepatic metastases with pulse-inversion US during the liver-specific
phase of SHU 508A: multicenter study.
Radiology.
2003;
227
361-370
MissingFormLabel
- 9
Albrecht T, Hoffmann C W, Schmitz S A. et al .
Phase-inversions sonography during the liver-specific late-phase of contrast-enhancement:
improved detection of liver metastases.
AJR.
2001;
5
1191-1198
MissingFormLabel
- 10
Quaia E, D’Onofrio M, Palumbo A. et al .
Comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography versus baseline ultrasound and contrast-enhanced
computed tomography in metastastic disease of the liver: diagnostic performance and
confidence.
Eur Radiol.
2006;
16
1599-1609
MissingFormLabel
- 11
Oldenburg A, Hohmann J, Foert E. et al .
Detection of hepatic metastases with low MI real time contrast enhanced sonography
and SonoVue.
Ultraschall in Med.
2005;
26
277-284
MissingFormLabel
- 12
Dietrich C F, Kratzer W, Strobel D. et al .
Assessment of metastatic liver disease in patients with primary extrahepatic tumors
by contrast-enhanced sonography versus CT and MRI.
World J Gastroenterol.
2006;
12
1699-1705
MissingFormLabel
- 13
Leen E, Ceccotti P, Moug S J. et al .
Potential value of contrast-enhanced intraoperative ultrasonography during partial
hepatectomy for metastases: an essential investigation before resection?.
Ann Surg.
2006;
243
236-240
MissingFormLabel
- 14
Konopke R, Kersting S, Bergert H. et al .
Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography to detect liver metastases: a prospective trial
to compare transcutaneous unenhanced and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in patients
undergoing laparotomy.
Int J Colorectal Dis.
2007;
22
201-207
MissingFormLabel
- 15
Piscaglia F, Corradi F, Mancini M. et al .
Real time contrast enhanced ultrasonography in detection of liver metastases from
gastrointestinal cancer.
BMC Cancer.
2007;
7
171
MissingFormLabel
- 16
Larsen L P, Rosenkilde M, Christensen H. et al .
The value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in detection of liver metastases from
colorectal cancer: a prospective double- blinded study.
Eur J Radiol.
2007;
62
302-307
MissingFormLabel
- 17
Claudon M, Cosgrove D, Albrecht T. et al .
(EFSUMB study group) Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast
enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) – update 2008.
Ultraschall in Med.
2008;
29
28-44
MissingFormLabel
- 18 Fleiss J L. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York, NY; Wiley 1981 2nd Ed: 212-236
MissingFormLabel
- 19
Dalla Palma L, Bertolotto M, Quaia E. et al .
Detection of liver metastases with pulse inversion harmonic imaging: preliminary results.
Eur Radiol.
1999;
9
S382-S387
MissingFormLabel
- 20
Del Frate C, Zuiani C, Londero V. et al .
Comparing Levovist-enhanced pulse inversion harmonic imaging and ferumoxides-enhanced
MR imaging of hepatic metastases.
Am J Roentgenol.
2003;
180
1339-1346
MissingFormLabel
- 21
Ward J, Guthrie J A, Wilson D. et al .
Colorectal hepatic metastases: detection with SPIO-enhanced breath-hold MR imaging
– comparison of optimized sequences.
Radiology.
2003;
228
709-718
MissingFormLabel
- 22
Bleuzen A, Huang C, Olar M. et al .
Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in focal lesions of the liver
using cadence contrast pulse sequencing.
Ultraschall in Med.
2006;
27
40-48
MissingFormLabel
- 23
Quaia E, Calliada F, Bertolotto M. et al .
Characterization of focal liver lesions with contrast-specific US modes and a sulfur
hexafluoride-filled microbubble contrast agent: diagnostic performance and confidence.
Radiology.
2004;
232
420-430
MissingFormLabel
- 24
Seitz K.
CEUS for liver tumors: facts, studies, relevance, and reality in the clinical routine.
Ultraschall in Med.
2008;
29
485-487
MissingFormLabel
- 25
Konopke R, Bunk A, Kersting S.
Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in patients with colorectal liver metastases after
chemotherapy.
Ultraschall in Med.
2008;
29
S203-S209
MissingFormLabel
- 26
Oldenburg A, Albrecht T.
Baseline and contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the liver in tumor patients.
Ultrashall in Med.
2008;
29
488-498
MissingFormLabel
- 27
Strobel D, Seitz K, Blank W. et al .
Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound for the Characterization of Focal Liver Lesions – Diagnostic
Accuracy in Clinical Practice (DEGUM multicenter trial).
Ultraschall in Med.
2008;
29
499-505
MissingFormLabel
- 28
Mostbeck G.
CEUS from a Radiological Standpoint: Dream and Reality.
Ultraschall in Med.
2009;
30
125
MissingFormLabel
Dr. Vito Cantisani
Department of Radiology, University ”La Sapienza”, Rome
Viale Regina Elena, 324
00161 Rome
Italy
Phone: + 39/34 71 74 39 47
Fax: + 39/06 49 02 43
Email: vito.cantisani@uniroma1.it