Do different types of liver lesions differ in their uptake of the microbubble contrast agent SHU 508A in the late liver phase? Early experience

PURPOSE: To compare the uptake of SH U 508A in different types of liver lesions by using stimulated acoustic emission. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-seven patients with characterized lesions (metastasis, n = 17; hepatocellular carcinoma, n = 4; hemangioma, n = 9; focal nodular hyperplasia, n = 7) received 2.5 g SH U 508A. After 5 minutes, stimulated acoustic emission was elicited by using a previously described method. Liver and/or lesional differences were assessed with videodensitometry (objective conspicuity score), and two observers assessed each lesion by using a six-point scale (subjective conspicuity score). RESULTS: Metastases and hepatocellular carcinoma had low stimulated acoustic emission; median objective conspicuity scores were 70% and 68% (all scores were greater than or equal to 43%), respectively, and subjective conspicuity scores were 2 or higher for both observers. Hemangiomas had reduced stimulated acoustic emission, with more variability; the median objective conspicuity score was 41% (range, 9%-72%), and the median subjective conspicuity scores were 2 (range, 1-4) and 3.5 (range, 1-5) for observers I and 2, respectively. Focal nodular hyperplasia had stimulated acoustic emission comparable to that of the liver in all cases; the median objective conspicuity score was -4.7% (all scores were <6%), and the subjective conspicuity score was I or lower for both observers, This finding completely separated focal nodular hyperplasia and malignancies. Significant differences were seen between focal nodular hyperplasia and all other lesion types (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Strong late-phase lesional uptake of SH U 508A is characteristic of focal nodular hyperplasia, is seen in some hemangiomas, and was not observed in malignancies.