Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of Gastric Cancer: Correlation with Perfusion CT and Histopathology
- Author:
Ijin JOO
1
;
Se Hyung KIM
;
Dong Ho LEE
;
Joon Koo HAN
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: Stomach cancer; Perfusion imaging; Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS); Histologic grade
- MeSH: Area Under Curve; Blood Volume; Ethics Committees, Research; Humans; Perfusion Imaging; Perfusion; Permeability; Prospective Studies; Receptor, Epidermal Growth Factor; Stomach Neoplasms; Ultrasonography
- From:Korean Journal of Radiology 2019;20(5):781-790
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) parameters and perfusion CT (PCT) parameters of gastric cancers and their correlation with histologic features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was approved by our Institutional Review Board. We included 43 patients with pathologically-proven gastric cancers undergoing CEUS using SonoVue® (Bracco) and PCT on the same day. Correlation between the CEUS parameters (peak intensity [PI], area under the curve [AUC], rise time [RT] from 10% to 90% of PI, time to peak [TTPUS], and mean transit time [MTTUS]) and PCT parameters (blood flow, blood volume, TTPCT, MTTCT, and permeability surface product) of gastric cancers were analyzed using Spearman's rank correlation test. In cases of surgical resection, the CEUS and PCT parameters were compared according to histologic features using Mann-Whitney test. RESULTS: CEUS studies were of diagnostic quality in 88.4% (38/43) of patients. Among the CEUS parameters of gastric cancers, RT and TTPUS showed significant positive correlations with TTPCT (rho = 0.327 and 0.374, p = 0.045 and 0.021, respectively); PI and AUC were significantly higher in well-differentiated or moderately-differentiated tumors (n = 4) than poorly-differentiated tumors (n = 18) (p = 0.026 and 0.033, respectively), whereas MTTCT showed significant differences according to histologic types (poorly cohesive carcinoma [PCC] vs. non-PCC), T-staging (≤ T2 vs. ≥ T3), N-staging (N0 vs. N-positive), and epidermal growth factor receptor expression (≤ faint vs. ≥ moderate staining) (p values < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In patients with gastric cancers, CEUS is technically feasible for the quantification of tumor perfusion and may provide correlative and complementary information to that of PCT, which may allow prediction of histologic features.
