Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2019-09-11
Feasibility of dynamic three-dimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound in focal liver lesions: Image quality evaluation and correlation of quantification with two-dimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound
Dynamic three-dimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound (3D-CEUS) with quantitative analysis is updated in recent years.
OBJECTIVE:
To explore the feasibility of dynamic 3D-CEUS in evaluation of dynamic vascular patterns of focal liver lesions (FLL), and to analyze the correlation of time-intensity curve (TIC) parameters between dynamic 3D-CEUS and two-dimensional CEUS (2D-CEUS).
METHODS:
Dynamic 3D-CEUS and 2D-CEUS were both carried out in 106 FLL cases with SonoVue. Divided into arterial, portal and late phases, dynamic 3D-CEUS image quality of 106 FLLs were scored by 2 readers separately and graded according to the overall score. The 2D-CEUS and identical 3D-CEUS TIC parameters of the same FLL were compared and the correlation of these parameters were analyzed.
RESULTS:
A satisfactory correlation (0.953) and a good inter-observer agreement (0.700) of 2 readers were achieved by using five-point score scale to image quality in 3 phases of dynamic 3D-CEUS. The boundaries of FLLs were clearest in arterial phase on dynamic 3D-CEUS. The depth and vascularization of FLLs only had influence on its image quality in only arterial phase (P = 0.002 and 0.000 respectively). The comparison of quantification between dynamic 3D-CEUS and 2D-CEUS of 56 FLLs were also underwent. Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of mean transit time (MTT) and time to peak (TP), were both 0.96, and Pearson correlation coefficients of all 5 TIC parameters were no less than 0.90 between dynamic 3D-CEUS and 2D-CEUS.
CONCLUSION:
Dynamic 3D-CEUS is technically feasible and can be used for clinical evaluation of the perfusion of FLL avoiding adverse factors of sampling. Quantitative 3D-CEUS parameters are stable and reliable, and have good correlation with those of 2D-CEUS.
ClaudonM, DietrichCF, ChoiBI, CosgroveDO, KudoM, NolsoeCP, et al. Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the liver-update 2012: A WFUMB-EFSUMB initiative in cooperation with representatives of AFSUMB, AIUM,ASUM, FLAUS and ICUS. Ultraschall Med. 2013;34(1):11–29.
2.
WiggermannP, WohlgemuthWA, HeiblM, VasiljA, LossM, SchreyerAG, et al. Dynamic evaluation and quantification of microvascularization during degradable starch microspheres transarterial Chemoembolisation (DSM-TACE) of HCC lesions using contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): A feasibility study. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2013;53(4):337–48.
3.
WiggermannP, HeiblM, NiessenC, Muller-WilleR, GossmannH, UllerW, et al. Degradable starch microspheres transarterial chemoembolisation (DSM-TACE) of HCC: Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography (DCE-US) based evaluation of therapeutic efficacy using a novel perfusion software. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2012;52(2-4):123–9.
4.
AverkiouM, LampaskisM, KyriakopoulouK, SkarlosD, KlouvasG, StrouthosC, et al. Quantification of tumor microvascularity with respiratory gated contrast enhanced ultrasound for monitoring therapy. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2010;36(1):68–77.
5.
BertolottoM, PozzatoG, CroceLS, NascimbenF, GaspariniC, CovaMA, et al. Blood flow changes in hepatocellular carcinoma after the administration of thalidomide assessed by reperfusion kinetics during microbubble infusion: Preliminary results. Invest Radiol. 2006;41(1):15–21.
6.
LassauN, KoscielnyS, ChamiL, ChebilM, BenatsouB, RocheA, et al. Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Early evaluation of response to bevacizumab therapy at dynamic contrast-enhanced US with quantification-preliminary results. Radiology. 2011;258(1):291–300.
7.
DongFJ, XuJF, DuD, JiaoY, ZhangL, LiM, et al. 3D analysis is superior to 2D analysis for contrast-enhanced ultrasound in revealing vascularity in focal liver lesions - A retrospective analysis of 83 cases. Ultrasonics. 2016;70:221–6.
8.
LuoW, NumataK, MorimotoM, NozakiA, NaganoY, SugimoriK, et al. Three-dimensional contrast-enhanced sonography of vascular patterns of focal liver tumors: Pilot study of visualization methods. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(1):165–73.
9.
LuoW, NumataK, MorimotoM, NozakiA, NaganoY, SugimoriK, et al. Clinical utility of contrast-enhanced three-dimensional ultrasound imaging with Sonazoid: Findings on hepatocellular carcinoma lesions. Eur J Radiol. 2009;72(3):425–31.
10.
XuHX, LuMD, XieXH, XieXY, XuZF, ChenLD, et al. Three-dimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the liver: Experience of 92 cases. Ultrasonics. 2009;49(3):377–85.
11.
SongY, ChengJ, ZhangR. Contribution of 3-Dimensional Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography (CEUS) Compared With 2-Dimensional CEUS in the Analysis of Liver Tumors. J Ultrasound Med. 2018;37(5):1117–28.
12.
LuoW, NumataK, MorimotoM, KondoM, TakebayashiS, OkadaM, et al. Focal liver tumors: Characterization with 3D perflubutane microbubble contrast agent-enhanced US versus 3D contrast-enhanced multidetector CT. Radiology. 2009;251(1):287–95.
13.
ClevertDA, D’AnastasiM, JungEM. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and microcirculation: Efficiency through dynamics-current developments. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2013;53(1-2):171–86.
14.
WangZ, WangW, LiuG, YangZ, ChenL, HuangY, et al. The role of quantitation of real-time 3-dimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound in detecting microvascular invasion: An in vivo study. Abdominal Radiology. 2016;41(10):1973–9.
15.
KimJ, KimJH, YoonSH, ChoiWS, KimYJ, HanJK, et al. Feasibility of Using Volumetric Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound with a 3-D Transducer to Evaluate Therapeutic Response after Targeted Therapy in Rabbit Hepatic VX2 Carcinoma. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2015;41(12):3131–9.
16.
LassauN, ChamiL, BenatsouB, PeronneauP, RocheA. Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (DCE-US) with quantification of tumor perfusion: A new diagnostic tool to evaluate the early effects of antiangiogenic treatment. European Radiology Supplements. 2007;17(S6):89–98.
17.
WangH, KanekoOF, TianL, HristovD, WillmannJK. Three-dimensional ultrasound molecular imaging of angiogenesis in colon cancer using a clinical matrix array ultrasound transducer. Invest Radiol. 2015;50(5):322–9.
18.
WangH, HristovD, QinJ, TianL, WillmannJK. Three-dimensional Dynamic contrast-enhanced Us imaging for early antiangiogenic Treatment assessment in a Mouse colon cancer Model. Radiology. 2015;277(2):424–34.
19.
HudsonJM, WilliamsR, Tremblay-DarveauC, SheeranPS, MilotL, BjarnasonGA, et al. Dynamic contrast enhanced ultrasound for therapy monitoring. Eur J Radiol. 2015;84(9):1650–7.
20.
LuY, LiuB, ZhengY, LuoJ, ZhangX, HuangG, et al. Application of real-time three-dimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound using SonoVue for the evaluation of focal liver lesions: A prospective single-center study. Am J Transl Res. 2018;10(5):1469–80.
21.
ElKA, SigristR, FisherG, BachawalS, LiauJ, WangH, et al. Quantitative Three-Dimensional Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Imaging: First-In-Human Pilot Study in Patients with Liver Metastases. Theranostics. 2017;7(15):3745–58.
22.
BeyerLP, WassermannF, PreglerB, MichalikK, RennertJ, WiesingerI, et al. Characterization of Focal Liver Lesions using CEUS and MRI with Liver-Specific Contrast Media: Experience of a Single Radiologic Center. Ultraschall Med. 2017;38(6):619–25.
23.
DongY, WangWP, MaoF, FanM, IgneeA, SerraC, et al. Contrast enhanced ultrasound features of hepatic cystadenoma and hepatic cystadenocarcinoma. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2017;52(3):365–72.
24.
StrobelD, SeitzK, BlankW, SchulerA, DietrichCF, von HerbayA, et al. Tumor-specific vascularization pattern of liver metastasis, hepatocellular carcinoma, hemangioma and focal nodular hyperplasia in the differential diagnosis of 1,349 liver lesions in contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Ultraschall Med. 2009;30(4):376–82.
WildnerD, SchellhaasB, StrackD, GoertzRS, PfeiferL, FiesslerC, et al. Differentiation of malignant liver tumors by software-based perfusion quantification with dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound (DCEUS). Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2019;71(1):39–51.
27.
GuoLH, WangD, QianYY, ZhengX, ZhaoCK, LiXL, et al. A two-stage multi-view learning framework based computer-aided diagnosis of liver tumors with contrast enhanced ultrasound images. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2018;69(3):343–54.
28.
SchellhaasB, WaldnerMJ, GortzRS, VitaliF, KielischC, PfeiferL, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and interobserver variability of Dynamic Vascular Pattern (DVP) in primary liver malignancies - A simple semiquantitative tool for the analysis of contrast enhancement patterns. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2017;66(4):317–31.
29.
RennertJ, GeorgievaM, SchreyerAG, JungW, RossC, StroszczynskiC, et al. Image fusion of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using volume navigation for detection, characterization and planning of therapeutic interventions of liver tumors. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2011;49(1-4):67–81.
30.
Zhong-ZhenS, KaiL, Rong-QinZ, Er-JiaoX, TingZ, Ao-HuaZ, et al. A feasibility study for determining ablative margin with 3D-CEUS-CT/MR image fusion after radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma. Ultraschall Med. 2012;33(7):E250–E255.
31.
ClevertDA, PaprottkaPM, HelckA, ReiserM, TrummCG. Image fusion in the management of thermal tumor ablation of the liver. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2012;52(2-4):205–16.
32.
NagyJA, ChangSH, ShihSC, DvorakAM, DvorakHF. Heterogeneity of the tumor vasculature. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2010;36(3):321–31.
33.
SonneC, XieF, LofJ, OberdorferJ, PhillipsP, CarrEE, et al. Differences in definity and optison microbubble destruction rates at a similar mechanical index with different real-time perfusion systems. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2003;16(11):1178–85.
34.
IgneeA, JedrejczykM, SchuesslerG, JakubowskiW, DietrichCF. Quantitative contrast enhanced ultrasound of the liver for time intensity curves-Reliability and potential sources of errors. Eur J Radiol. 2010;73(1):153–8.
35.
JangHJ, KimTK, WilsonSR. Small nodules (1-2cm) in liver cirrhosis: Characterization with contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Eur J Radiol. 2009;72(3):418–24.
