Comparison of Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasound and contrast-enhanced MRI in the diagnosis of focal liver lesions
10.3760/cma.j.cn131148-20201223-00963
- VernacularTitle:Sonazoid超声造影与增强磁共振成像对肝脏局灶性病变的诊断价值比较
- Author:
Xuanyin WU
1
;
Guo TIAN
;
Hongcui CAO
;
Jiong YU
;
Tian′an JIANG
Author Information
1. 浙江大学医学院附属第一医院超声医学科，杭州 310003
- Keywords:
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound;
Sonazoid;
Focal liver lesions;
Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging;
Diagnosis
- From:
Chinese Journal of Ultrasonography
2021;30(6):494-499
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the diagnostic efficacies of Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) in the diagnosis of focal liver lesions (FLLs), and to evaluate the clinical value of Sonazoid.Methods:A total of 58 FLLs in 50 patients who underwent Sonazoid-CEUS and CE-MRI examinations from July 2019 to January 2021 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine were enrolled in this study according to the inclusion criteria. The final diagnostic reference standard was decided by surgical pathology or ultrasound-guided biopsy pathology. Sonazoid-CEUS and CE-MRI features of benign and malignant FLLs were analyzed, and the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic coincidence rate of the two tests were calculated respectively.Results:There was a statistically significant difference between benign and malignant FLLs in the imaging pattern of homogeneous or heterogeneous intratumoral enhancement in the artery-dominant phase and washout images in the late phase( P<0.001).9.8%(4/41) of the malignant lesions did not decrease until the late phase but decreased in the post-vascular phase. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic coincidence rate of the two tests were 97.6%, 52.9%, 83.3%, 90.0%, 84.5%(Sonazoid-CEUS) and 85.4%, 64.7%, 85.4%, 64.7%, 79.3%(CE-MRI), the differences of sensitivity and specificity were not statistically significant ( P=0.125, P=0.687). Conclusions:The vascular phase in Sonazoid-CEUS is still an important diagnostic sign of FLLs, and the unique Kupffer phase can provide additional information for the diagnosis. Sonazoid-CEUS has the same important value as CE-MRI in the diagnosis of FLLs.
