Utility of contrast-enhanced ultrasound with perflubutane for diagnosing the macroscopic type of small nodular hepatocellular carcinomas

Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound With Perfluorobutane for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Diagnosis: Comparison of Imaging Phases and Diagnostic Criteria

BACKGROUND. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with perfluorobutane has used varying protocols and diagnostic criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article was to assess diagnostic performance for HCC of CEUS with perfluorobutane in high-risk patients using various criteria. METHODS. This retrospective post hoc study evaluating individual patient data from three earlier prospective studies from one hospital included 204 patients (136 men, 68 women; mean age, 63 ± 11 [SD] years) at high risk of HCC with 213 liver observations. Patients underwent CEUS using perfluorobutane from March 2019 to June 2022. Three radiologists (the examination's operator and two subsequent reviewers) independently interpreted examinations, assessing arterial, portal venous (arterial phase completion through 2 minutes), transitional (2-5 minutes after injection), and Kupffer (≥ 10 minutes after injection) phase findings. Six criteria for HCC were tested: 1, any arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) with Kupffer phase hypoenhancement; 2, nonrim APHE with Kupffer phase hypoenhancement; 3, nonrim APHE with portal venous washout; 4, nonrim APHE with portal venous washout and/or Kupffer phase hypoenhancement; 5, nonrim APHE with portal venous and/or transitional washout; 6, nonrim APHE with any of portal venous washout, transitional washout, or Kupffer phase hypoenhancement. Depending on the criteria, observations were instead deemed to be a non-HCC malignancy if showing rim APHE, early washout (at < 1 minute), or marked washout (at 2 minutes). Reference was pathology for malignant observations and pathology or imaging follow-up for benign observations. Diagnostic performance was assessed, pooling readers' data. RESULTS. Criterion 1 (no recognized features of non-HCC malignancy) had highest sensitivity (86.9%) but lowest specificity (43.2%) for HCC. Compared with nonrim APHE and portal venous washout (criterion 3), the addition of Kupffer phase hypoenhancement (criterion 4), transitional washout (criterion 5), or either feature (criterion 6) significantly increased sensitivity (34.4% vs 62.6-64.2%) and accuracy (61.8% vs 75.1-76.5%), but significantly decreased specificity (98.5% vs 91.9-94.1%). Criteria 2, 4, 5, and 6 (all incorporating transitional washout and/or Kupffer phase hypoenhancement) showed no significant differences in sensitivity (62.6-64.2%), specificity (91.9-94.1%), or accuracy (75.1-76.5%). CONCLUSION. Recognition of features of non-HCC malignancy improved specificity for HCC. Incorporation of the findings of transitional washout and/or Kupffer phase hypoenhancement improved sensitivity and accuracy, albeit lowered specificity, versus arterial and portal venous findings alone, without further performance variation among criteria incorporating those two findings. CLINICAL IMPACT. Kupffer phase acquisition may be optional for observations classified as HCC or non-HCC malignancy by arterial, portal venous, and transitional phases.

Perfluorobutane-Enhanced Ultrasound for Characterization of Hepatocellular Carcinoma From Non-hepatocellular Malignancies or Benignancy: Comparison of Imaging Acquisition Methods

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the work described here was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of perfluorobutane (PFB)-enhanced ultrasound in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from non-HCC malignancies and other benign lesions using different acquisition methods.

METHODS

This prospective study included 69 patients with solid liver lesions larger than 1 cm who were scheduled for biopsy or radiofrequency ablation between September 2020 and March 2021. Lesion diagnosis was designated by three blinded radiologists after reviewing three different sets of acquired images selected according to the following presumed acquisition methods: (i) method A, acquisition up to 5 min after contrast injection; (ii) method B, acquisition up to 1 min after contrast injection with additional Kupffer phase; and (iii) method C, acquisition up to 5 min after contrast injection with additional Kupffer phase.

RESULTS

After excluding 7 technical failures, 62 patients with liver lesions (mean size: 24.2 ± 14.8 mm), which consisted of 7 benign lesions, 37 non-HCC malignancies and 18 HCCs. For the HCC diagnosis, method C had the highest sensitivity (75.9%), followed by method B (72.2%) and method A (68.5%), but failed to exhibit statistical significance (p = 0.12). There was no significant difference with respect to the pooled specificity between the three methods (p = 0.28). Diagnostic accuracy was the highest with method C (87.1%) but failed to exhibit statistical significance (p = 0.24).

CONCLUSION

Image acquisition up to 5 min after contrast injection with additional Kupffer phase could potentially result in high accuracy and sensitivity without loss of specificity in diagnosing HCC with PFB-enhanced ultrasound.

Usefulness of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for biliary tract disease

Conventional ultrasonography (US) for biliary tract disease shows high time and spatial resolution. In addition, it is simple and minimally invasive, and is selected as a first-choice examination procedure for biliary tract disease. Currently, contrast-enhanced US (CEUS), which facilitates the more accurate assessment of lesion blood flow in comparison with color and power Doppler US, is performed using a second-generation ultrasonic contrast agent. Such agents are stable and provide a timeline for CEUS diagnosis. Gallbladder lesions are classified into three types: gallbladder biliary lesion (GBL), gallbladder polypoid lesion (GPL), and gallbladder wall thickening (GWT). Bile duct lesions can also be classified into three types: bile duct biliary lesion (BBL), bile duct polypoid lesion (BDPL), and bile duct wall thickening (BDWT). CEUS facilitates the differentiation of GBL/BBL from tumorous lesions based on the presence or absence of blood vessels. In the case of GPL, it is important to identify a vascular stalk attached to the lesion. In the case of GWT, the presence or absence of a non-contrast-enhanced area, the Rokitansky-Aschoff sinus, and continuity of a contrast-enhanced gallbladder wall layer are important for differentiation from gallbladder cancer. In the case of BDWT, it is useful to evaluate the contour of the contrast-enhanced medial layer of the bile duct wall for differentiating IgG4-related sclerosing cholangitis from primary sclerosing cholangitis. CEUS for ampullary carcinoma accurately reflects histopathological findings of the lesion. Evaluating blood flow in the lesion, continuity of the gallbladder wall, and contour of the bile duct wall via CEUS provides useful information for the diagnosis of biliary tract disease.

Utility of Sonazoid-Enhanced Ultrasound for the Macroscopic Classification of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-analysis

We assessed the diagnostic value of Sonazoid-enhanced ultrasound (SEUS) in determining the macroscopic classification of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) because of its strong relevance to the poor prognosis of the non-simple nodular (non-SN) type. The PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies investigating patients who underwent surgery for HCC after undergoing SEUS pre-operatively. Five studies involving a total of 334 patients met the inclusion criteria. The summary sensitivity and specificity were 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63-0.83) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.82-0.97), respectively. The positive and negative likelihood ratios of SEUS for determining the macroscopic classification of HCC in Kupffer phase were 9.21 (95% CI: 4.02-21.13) and 0.28 (95% CI: 0.19-0.41), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio of SEUS for determining the macroscopic classification of HCC was 34.2 (95% CI: 11.64-100.51), and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.84-0.90). Subgroup analysis suggested that small HCCs (≤30 mm) and studies including fewer than 70 patients may be associated with a higher diagnostic odds ratio than the corresponding subsets. SEUS had moderate diagnostic value for determining the macroscopic classification of HCC in the Kupffer phase.

The AFSUMB Consensus Statements and Recommendations for the Clinical Practice of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound using Sonazoid

The first edition of the guidelines for the use of ultrasound contrast agents was published in 2004, dealing with liver applications. The second edition of the guidelines in 2008 reflected changes in the available contrast agents and updated the guidelines for the liver, as well as implementing some nonliver applications. The third edition of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) guidelines was the joint World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology-European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (WFUMB-EFSUMB) venture in conjunction with other regional US societies such as Asian Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, resulting in a simultaneous duplicate on liver CEUS in the official journals of both WFUMB and EFSUMB in 2013. However, no guidelines were described mainly for Sonazoid due to limited clinical experience only in Japan and Korea. The new proposed consensus statements and recommendations provide general advice on the use of Sonazoid and are intended to create standard protocols for the use and administration of Sonazoid in hepatic and pancreatobiliary applications in Asian patients and to improve patient management.

The AFSUMB Consensus Statements and Recommendations for the Clinical Practice of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound using Sonazoid

The first edition of the guidelines for the use of ultrasound contrast agents was published in 2004, dealing with liver applications. The second edition of the guidelines in 2008 reflected changes in the available contrast agents and updated the guidelines for the liver, as well as implementing some nonliver applications. The third edition of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) guidelines was the joint World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology-European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (WFUMB-EFSUMB) venture in conjunction with other regional US societies such as Asian Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, resulting in a simultaneous duplicate on liver CEUS in the official journals of both WFUMB and EFSUMB in 2013. However, no guidelines were described mainly for Sonazoid due to limited clinical experience only in Japan and Korea. The new proposed consensus statements and recommendations provide general advice on the use of Sonazoid and are intended to create standard protocols for the use and administration of Sonazoid in hepatic and pancreatobiliary applications in Asian patients and to improve patient management.

Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Shear Wave Elastography in Differentiating Benign and Malignant Lesions: A Network Meta-Analysis

Background: We performed a network meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and shear wave elastography (SWE) in differentiating benign and malignant lesions in different body sites.

Methods: A computerized literature search of Medline, Embase, SCOPUS, and Web of Science was performed using relevant keywords. Following data extraction, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR), negative LR, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for CEUS, and SWE compared to histopathology as a reference standard. Statistical analyses were conducted by MetaDiSc (version 1.4) and R software (version 3.4.3).

Results: One hundred and fourteen studies (15,926 patients) were pooled in the final analyses. Network meta-analysis showed that CEUS had significantly higher DOR than SWE (DOR = 27.14, 95%CI [2.30, 51.97]) in breast cancer detection. However, there were no significant differences between CEUS and SWE in hepatic (DOR = −6.67, 95%CI [−15.08, 1.74]) and thyroid cancer detection (DOR = 3.79, 95%CI [−3.10, 10.68]). Interestingly, ranking analysis showed that CEUS achieved higher DOR in detecting breast and thyroid cancer, while SWE achieved higher DOR in detecting hepatic cancer. The overall DOR for CEUS in detecting renal cancer was 53.44, 95%CI [29.89, 95.56] with an AUROC of 0.95, while the overall DOR for SWE in detecting prostate cancer was 25.35, 95%CI [7.15, 89.89] with an AUROC of 0.89.

Conclusion: Both diagnostic tests showed relatively high sensitivity and specificity in detecting malignant tumors in different organs. Network meta-analysis showed that CEUS had higher diagnostic accuracy than SWE in detecting breast and thyroid cancer, while SWE had higher accuracy in detecting hepatic cancer. However, the results were not statistically significant in hepatic and thyroid malignancies. Further head-to-head comparisons are needed to confirm the optimal imaging technique to differentiate each cancer type.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of hepatocellular carcinoma: where do we stand?

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) represents a significant breakthrough in ultrasonography (US), and it is being increasingly used for the evaluation of focal liver lesions (FLLs). CEUS is unique in that it allows non-invasive assessment of liver perfusion in real time throughout the vascular phase, which has led to dramatic improvements in the diagnostic accuracy of US in the detection and characterization of FLLs, the choice of therapeutic procedures, and the evaluation of response. Currently, CEUS is included as a part of the suggested diagnostic work-up of FLLs, including in cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, resulting in better patient management and cost-effective delivery of therapy.

Patients with early recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma have poor prognosis

BACKGROUND

Early recurrence (ER) after hepatic resection (HR) is a poor prognostic factor for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aimed to identify the clinicopathological features, outcomes, and risk factors for ER after HR for small HCC in order to clarify the reasons why ER is a worse recurrence pattern.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined 130 patients who underwent HR for small HCC (≤30 mm). Recurrence was classified into ER (<2 years) and late recurrence (LR) (≥2 years). The clinicopathological features, outcomes, and risk factors for ER were analyzed by multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

ER was observed in 39 patients (30.0%). The survival rate of the ER group was significantly lower than that of the LR group (P<0.005), and ER was an independent prognostic factor for poor survival (P=0.0001). The ER group had a significantly higher frequency (P=0.0039) and shorter interval (P=0.027) of development to carcinoma beyond the Milan criteria (DBMC) compared with the LR group, and ER was an independent risk factor for DBMC (P<0.0001). Multi-nodularity, non-simple nodular type, and microvascular invasion were independent predictors for ER (P=0.012, 0.010, and 0.019, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

ER was a highly malignant recurrence pattern associated with DBMC and subsequent poor survival after HR for small HCC. Multi-nodularity, non-simple nodular type, and microvascular invasion predict ER, and taking these factors into consideration may be useful for the decision of the treatment strategy for small HCC after HR.

Comparison of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Gadolinium-Ethoxybenzyl-Diethylenetriamine Pentaacetic Acid-Enhanced MRI for the Diagnosis of Macroscopic Type of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

We compared the efficacy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound sonography (CEUS) with sonazoid and gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced MRI for the assessment of macroscopic classification of nodular hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

Seventy-seven consecutive patients with 79 surgically resected HCCs who underwent both preoperative CEUS and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI were enrolled in this retrospective study. Based on the macroscopic diagnosis of resected specimens, nodules were categorized into the simple nodular (SN) and non-SN type HCC. Two hepatologists independently assessed image datasets of the post-vascular phase of CEUS and hepatobiliary phase of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI to compare their diagnostic performance.

RESULTS

Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI enabled the evaluation of macroscopic classification in a significantly larger number of nodules than CEUS (78/79 (98.7%) vs. 70/79 (88.6%), p < 0.05). Of 70 nodules that could be evaluated by both modalities, 41 and 29 nodules were pathologically categorized as SN and non-SN, respectively. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for non-SN did not differ between CEUS and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI (reader 1: 0.748 for CEUS, 0.808 for MRI; reader 2: 0.759 for CEUS, 0.787 for MRI). The AUC of combined CEUS and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI for SN HCC was 0.855 (reader 1) and 0.824 (reader 2), indicating higher AUC values for the combined modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic performance for macroscopic classification of nodular HCC of CEUS was comparable with that of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI, although some HCCs could not be evaluated by CEUS owing to lower detectability. The combination of the 2 modalities had a more accurate diagnostic performance.

Role of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography with Sonazoid for hepatocellular carcinoma: evidence from a 10-year experience

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents primary liver cancer. Because the development of HCC limits the prognosis as well as the quality of life of the patients, its management should be properly conducted based on an accurate diagnosis. The liver is the major target organ of ultrasound (US), which is the simple, non-invasive, and real-time imaging method available worldwide. Microbubble-based contrast agents are safe and reliable and have become popular, which has resulted in the improvement of diagnostic performances of US due to the increased detectability of the peripheral blood flow. Sonazoid (GE Healthcare, Waukesha, WI, USA), a second-generation contrast agent, shows the unique property of accumulation in the liver and spleen. Contrast-enhanced US with Sonazoid is now one of the most frequently used modalities in the practical management of liver tumors, including the detection and characterization of the nodule, evaluation of the effects of non-surgical treatment, intraoperative support, and post-treatment surveillance. This article reviews the 10-year evidence for contrast-enhanced US with Sonazoid in the practical management of HCC.

Intensity-Based Assessment of Microbubble-Enhanced Ultrasonography: Phase-Related Diagnostic Ability for Cellular Differentiation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

This prospective study aimed to elucidate the effect of phase-related quantitative parameters of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with perflubutane microbubble agent to assess the cellular differentiation of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Intensity was analyzed in 94 lesions (19.4 ± 4.9 mm, 86 patients), 47 well-differentiated HCCs (wHCCs) and 47 moderately-differentiated HCCs (mHCCs): I(e) (early phase) = I(te) (tumor) - I(le) (liver), I(p) (post-vascular phase) = I(tp) (tumor) - I(lp) (liver), I(ep) = I(e) - I(p). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve with the best cutoff value (I(e), 13.2, I(p), -4.5, I(ep), 21.3) for discriminating between wHCC and mHCC was 0.6922 for Ie, 0.7680 for Ip and 0.7925 for Iep, which indicated a significantly greater ability to differentiate between wHCC and mHCC compared with visual/qualitative assessment (early phase, 0.6170, p = 0.04; post-vascular phase, 0.6702, p = 0.01; both phases, 0.7021, p = 0.04). In conclusion, I(ep) was found to have the highest diagnostic ability, suggesting it is a promising parameter for the cellular differentiation of HCCs with CEUS.

Tumor Markers for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Simple and Significant Predictors of Outcome in Patients with HCC

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of tumor markers in evaluating outcomes of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains to be clarified.

SUMMARY

The usefulness of the HCC tumor markers, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), Lens culinaris agglutinin-reactive fraction of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP-L3), and des-gamma-carboxy prothrombin (DCP) was reviewed. Elevations in these tumor markers at the time of HCC diagnosis correlate with disease progression as assessed by both imaging studies and pathologic examinations. The combination of these three tumor markers results in good predictive ability for patient survival after diagnosis. In addition, combination at the time of HCC diagnosis of these three tumor markers (as a measure of tumor progression) and serum albumin and bilirubin levels (as indicators of remnant liver function) can be used for HCC staging and further predicts prognosis in patients with HCC.

KEY MESSAGE

The prognosis of patients with HCC can be well discriminated based solely on serum markers. Staging of HCC with serum markers is objective; if stored serum samples are available, HCC stages can be standardized across different countries and time periods.