Hepatic tumor detection: MR Imaging and conventional US versus pulse-inversion harmonic US of NC100100 during its reticuloendothelial system-specific phase

被引:70
作者
Forsberg, F [1 ]
Piccoli, CW [1 ]
Liu, JB [1 ]
Rawool, NM [1 ]
Merton, DA [1 ]
Mitchell, DG [1 ]
Goldberg, BB [1 ]
机构
[1] Thomas Jefferson Univ Hosp, Dept Radiol, Div Ultrasound, Philadelphia, PA 19107 USA
关键词
animals; liver neoplasms; MR; US; ultrasound; (US); harmonic study;
D O I
10.1148/radiol.2223001786
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
PURPOSE: To compare conventional ultrasonography (US) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with contrast agent-enhanced US for detection of VX-2 liver tumors in rabbits. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Conventional gray-scale liver US was performed in 65 rabbits, 38 of which had VX-2 hepatic tumor implants. Twenty minutes after contrast agent injection, gray-scale pulse-inversion harmonic US images of the liver-specific phase were obtained. Following sacrifice of the animals, T1- and T2-weighted MR imaging was performed at 4-mm intervals. Pathologic analysis was performed as the reference standard. The capability of each imaging modality to correctly depict tumor presence or absence and the number of tumors was compared. RESULTS: Conventional US correctly depicted the presence or absence of tumors in 54 rabbits, for an accuracy of 83%, sensitivity of 71%, and specificity of 100%. With contrast-enhanced US, accuracy increased to 92% (60 correct cases); sensitivity, to 87%; and specificity, to 100%. MR imaging facilitated 56 correct diagnoses, for an accuracy of 86%, sensitivity of 82%, and specificity of 93%. There was a marginally significant difference between US with and US without contrast agent (P = .07) but not between MR imaging and contrast-enhanced US (P greater than or equal to .34). When the numbers of correctly detected tumors were compared, contrast-enhanced US performed significantly better than MR imaging (P = .02) and conventional US (P = .04). CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference between contrast-enhanced US and MR imaging in the detection of hepatic tumors, whereas contrast-enhanced US had the highest accuracy (92%) of the three modalities studied. (C) RSNA, 2002.
引用
收藏
页码:824 / 829
页数:6
相关论文
共 38 条
[11]   On the feasibility of real time, in vivo harmonic imaging with proteinaceous microspheres [J].
Forsberg, F ;
Goldberg, BB ;
Liu, JB ;
Merton, DA ;
Rawool, NM .
JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE, 1996, 15 (12) :853-860
[12]  
FORSBERG F, 1994, J ULTRAS MED, V13, P357
[13]  
Forsberg F, 2000, J ULTRAS MED, V19, P557
[14]   Comparison of fundamental and wideband harmonic contrast imaging of liver tumors [J].
Forsberg, F ;
Liu, JB ;
Chiou, HJ ;
Rawool, NM ;
Parker, L ;
Goldberg, BB .
ULTRASONICS, 2000, 38 (1-8) :110-113
[15]  
FRITZSCH T, 1997, ULTRASOUND CONTRAST, P169
[16]  
GOLDBERG B, 1997, ULTRASOUND CONTRAST
[17]  
GOLDBERG BB, 1997, RADIOLOGY, V205, P417
[18]   DETECTION OF LIVER METASTASES - COMPARISON OF SUPERPARAMAGNETIC IRON OXIDE-ENHANCED AND UNENHANCED MR-IMAGING ART 1.5 T WITH DYNAMIC CT, INTRAOPERATIVE US, AND PERCUTANEOUS US [J].
HAGSPIEL, KD ;
NEIDL, KFW ;
EICHENBERGER, AC ;
WEDER, W ;
MARINCEK, B .
RADIOLOGY, 1995, 196 (02) :471-478
[19]   Hepatic malignancies: Improved detection with pulse-inversion US in late phase of enhancement with SHU 508A - Early experience [J].
Harvey, CJ ;
Blomley, MJK ;
Eckersley, RJ ;
Cosgrove, DO ;
Patel, N ;
Heckemann, RA ;
Butler-Barnes, J .
RADIOLOGY, 2000, 216 (03) :903-908
[20]  
Hedrick W. R., 1993, J. Diagnostic Med. Sonography, V9, P228