Diagnostic Accuracy of CEUS in the Differential Diagnosis of Small (≤ 20 mm) and Subcentimetric (≤ 10 mm) Focal Liver Lesions in Comparison with Histology

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund: Evaluierung der diagnostischen Treffsicherheit der Kontrastmittelsonografie in der Differenzialdiagnose kleiner Leberläsionen.

Material und Methoden: 1349 Patienten mit im B-Bild und Power Doppler unklarem Lebertumor wurden prospektiv mittels KM-Sono multizentrisch mit standardisiertem Protokoll (mechanischer Index < 0,4, Phase/Puls-Inversion-Technik, Sonovue-Bolus-Injektion) untersucht. Die Differenzialdiagnose im KM-Sono basierte auf tumortypischen Vaskularisationsmustern in der arteriellen, portalvenösen Phase und Spätphase (EFSUMB-Leitlinie). 335 Patienten mit fokalen Leberläsionen (FLLs) ≤ 20 mm wurden analysiert. Die Tumorklassifizierung nach KM-Sono wurde mit der Histologie (73,2 %) oder in einigen Fällen mit CT und/oder MRT verglichen.

Ergebnisse: Eine definitive Tumordiagnose war in 329 FLLs möglich. Die Enddiagnose der ≤ 20 mm FLLs mit histologischer Sicherung (n = 241) beinhaltete 87 benigne und 154 maligne Tumore. Die diagnostische Treffsicherheit des KM-Sono bei ≤ 20 mm histologisch gesicherten FLLs war 83,8 %. Die KM-Sono identifizierte 144 /154 maligne FLLs (Sensitivität 93,5 %) und 58 /87 benigne FLLs (Spezifität 66,7 %). 24 /241 FLLs blieben nach der KM-Sono unklar (9,9 %). Die KM-Sono klassifizierte 15 /241 FLLs (6,2 %) falsch (12 benigne und 3 maligne FLLs). Die positive Voraussagekraft der KM-Sono bei malignen FLLs war 92,3 %, die negative Voraussagekraft 95,1 %. Von 241 histologisch gesicherten FLLs waren 62 FLLs ≤ 10 mm (diagnostische Treffsicherheit KM-Sono 80,6 %) und 179 FLLs > 10 mm ≤ 20 mm (diagnostische Treffsicherheit KM-Sono 80,6 %).

Schlussfolgerung: Die KM-Sonografie hat eine hohe diagnostische Treffsicherheit in der Differenzierung kleiner und kleinster (≤ 1 cm) FLL im klinischen Alltag.

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the differential diagnosis of small and subcentimetric liver tumors in clinical practice.

Materials and Methods: 1349 patients with a hepatic tumor lacking a definite diagnosis based on B-mode ultrasound and power Doppler ultrasound were examined at 14 hospitals by CEUS using a standardized protocol (pulse/phase inversion imaging, mechanical index < 0.4). Differential diagnosis was based on the vascularity pattern and contrast enhancement pattern during the arterial, portal, and late phase according to the EFSUMB guidelines. 335 patients with focal liver lesions (FLL) ≤ 20 mm were analyzed. The tumor status established after CEUS was compared to histology (73.2 %) or in some cases to CT or MRI.

Results: A definitive diagnosis based on the gold standard was possible in 329 FLLs, while 6 FLLs remained unclear even in the combined gold standard (histology and/or CT and/or MRI). The final diagnoses of ≤ 20 mm FLL with histological confirmation (n = 241) included 87 benign and 154 malignant entities. The overall diagnostic accuracy of CEUS in FLL ≤ 20 mm with histological confirmation was 83.8 %. CEUS correctly identified 144 /154 malignant FLLs (sensitivity 93.5 %) and 58 /87 benign FLLs (specificity 66.7 %). 24 /241 FLLs remained unclear after CEUS (9.9 %). CEUS misclassified 15 /241 FLLs (6.2 %; 12 benign and 3 malignant FLLs). The positive predictive value of CEUS for a malignant FLL was 92.3 % and the negative predictive value was 95.1 %. Out of 241 small FLLs with histological confirmation, 62  FLLs were ≤ 10 mm (diagnostic accuracy of CEUS 80.6 %) and 179 FLLs were > 10 mm and ≤ 20 mm (diagnostic accuracy of CEUS 84.9 %).

Conclusion: CEUS has a high diagnostic accuracy for the differential diagnosis of small and subcentimetric FLLs in clinical practice.

Key words

abdomen - tumor - ultrasound - tumor

• References

• 1 Jones EC, Chezmar JL, Nelson RC et al. The frequency and significance of small hepatic lesions (<15 mm) detected by CT. AJR 1992; 158: 535-539
• 2 Schwartz LH, Gandras EJ, Colangelo SM et al. Prevalence and importance of small hepatic lesions found at CT in patients with cancer. Radiology 1999; 210: 71-74
• 3 Laghi F, Catalano O, Maresca M et al. Indeterminate, subcentimetric focal liver lesions in cancer patients: additional role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Ultraschall in Med 2010; 31: 283-288
• 4 Strobel D, Seitz K, Blank W et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the characterization of focal liver lesions – diagnostic accuracy in clinical practice (DEGUM multicenter trial). Ultraschall in Med 2008; 29: 499-505
• 5 Strobel D, Seitz K, Blank W et al. Tumor-specific vascularization pattern of liver metastasis, hepatocellular carcinoma, hemangioma and FNH in the differential diagnosis of 1,349 liver lesions in contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Ultraschall in Med 2009; 30: 376-382
• 6 Tranquart F, Correas JM, Ladam MarcusV et al. Real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the evaluation of focal liver lesions: diagnostic efficacy and economical issues from a French multicentric study. J Radiol 2009; 90: 109-122
• 7 Schuler A, Reuss J, Delorme S et al. Costs of clinical ultrasound examinations – an economical cost calculation and analysis. Ultraschall in Med 2010; 31: 379-386
• 8 Romanini L, Passamonti M, Aiani L et al. Economic assessment of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for evaluation of focal liver lesions: a multicentre Italian experience. Eur Radiol 2007; 17: F99-F106
• 9 Claudon M, Cosgrove D, Albrecht T et al. Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) – update 2008. Ultraschall in Med 2008; 29: 28-44
• 10 Seitz K, Strobel D, Bernatik T et al. Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) for the characterization of focal liver lesions – prospective comparison in clinical practice: CEUS vs. CT (DEGUM multicenter trial). Ultraschall in Med 2009; 30: 383-389
• 11 Seitz K, Bernatik T, Strobel D et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) for the characterization of focal liver lesions in clinical practice (DEGUM Multicenter Trial): CEUS vs. MRI – a prospective comparison in 269 patients.. Ultraschall in Med 2010; 31: 492-499
• 12 Mostbeck G. Imaging of focal liver lesions: the 90%-rule. Ultraschall in Med 2010; 31: 545-547
• 13 Khalil HI, Patterson SA, Panicek DM. Hepatic lesions deemed too small to characterize at CT: prevalence and importance in women with breast cancer. Radiology 2005; 235: 872-878
• 14 Patterson SA, Khalil HI, Panicek DM. MRI evaluation of small hepatic lesions in women with breast cancer. AJR 2006; 187: 307-312
• 15 Tan CH, Bhosale PR, Das P et al. Multidetector computed tomography follow-up of hypoattenuating small liver lesions in patients with rectal cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 2011; 34: 411-416
• 16 Kim KW, Kim AY, Kim TK et al. Small ((2 cm) hepatic lesions in colorectal cancer patients: detection and characterization on mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182: 1233-1240