Download PDF
Ultraschall Med 2012; 33(S 01): S11-S21
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1312890
Supplement
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

EFSUMB Guidelines 2011: Comments and Illustrations

EFSUMB-Leitlinien 2011: Kommentare und Illustrationen
C. F. Dietrich
,
X. W. Cui
,
D. G. Schreiber-Dietrich
,
A. Ignee
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
21 June 2012 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (EFSUMB) introduced the first guidelines on the use of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in 2004. This EFSUMB document focused mainly on liver applications. However, new applications extending beyond the liver were subsequently developed. Therefore, in the update of the clinical recommendations on the use of CEUS by the EFSUMB, applications in other organs were also described and published in 2008. Increased interest in recent years in the CEUS technique and in the application of CEUS in novel fields has resulted in CEUS indications and applications for nearly all organ systems. As a result, the EFSUMB initiated a new update of the guidelines in 2011 to include this additional knowledge. Some of the indications are established, whereas others are preliminary. The latter indications are categorized as emergent CEUS applications since the available evidence is insufficient for general recommendation. This article focuses on comments, illustrations and examples of the application of CEUS in the pancreas, spleen, gastrointestinal tract, kidney, adrenals, lymph nodes, perineum, and hepatobiliary system. The potential for endoscopic ultrasound to highlight the importance of CEUS in the daily routine is also addressed.

Zusammenfassung

Leitlinien zum kontrastverstärkten Ultraschall (CEUS) wurden erstmalig von der EFSUMB (“European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology”) 2004 publiziert. Dieses Manuskript erläuterte die Möglichkeiten der kontrastverstärkten Lebersonografie. Weitere Anwendungsmöglichkeiten haben sich in den folgenden Jahren etabliert, sodass ein Update 2008 notwendig wurde, das auch andere Organsysteme beinhaltete. In den Folgejahren beschleunigte sich die rasante Entwicklung und es gibt aktuell kaum ein Organsystem, das nicht mittels CEUS untersucht worden ist. Unterschieden werden etablierte Indikationen von möglichen Indikationen, die sich erst im routinemäßigen Alltag bewähren müssen. Die EFSUM hat somit 2011 aktuelle Leitlinien publiziert, die sich mit nicht hepatischen Indikationen beschäftigen und die in diesem Manuskript kommentiert und illustriert werden.

Key words

diagnosis - characterisation - metastases - hepatocellular carcinoma - guidelines - hemangioma - microbubble contrast agent
 

  • References

  • 1 Piscaglia F, Nolsoe C, Dietrich CF et al. The EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations on the Clinical Practice of Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS): Update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. Ultraschall in Med 2011; DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1281676.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Albrecht T, Blomley M, Bolondi L et al. Guidelines for the use of contrast agents in ultrasound. January 2004. Ultraschall in Med 2004; 25: 249-256
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 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
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Dietrich CF. Comments and illustrations regarding the guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) – update 2008. Ultraschall in Med 2008; 29: S188-S202
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Piscaglia F, Bolondi L. The safety of Sonovue in abdominal applications: retrospective analysis of 23188 investigations. Ultrasound Med Biol 2006; 32: 1369-1375
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Main ML, Ryan AC, Davis TE et al. Acute mortality in hospitalized patients undergoing echocardiography with and without an ultrasound contrast agent (multicenter registry results in 4,300,966 consecutive patients). Am J Cardiol 2008; 102: 1742-1746
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gilja OH. Report Education and Professional Standard Committee. In EFSUMB Newsletter. Ultraschall in Med 2009; 30: 86-87
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Dietrich CF, Ignee A, Hocke M et al. Pitfalls and artefacts using contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Z Gastroenterol 2011; 49: 350-356
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Ignee A, Baum U, Schuessler G et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound-guided percutaneous cholangiography and cholangiodrainage (CEUS-PTCD). Endoscopy 2009; 41: 725-726
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Nolsoe C, Piscaglia F, Dietrich C et al. Primum non nocere? Why Can’t We Use Second Generation Ultrasound Contrast Agents for the Examination of Children?. Ultraschall in Med 2011; 32: 83-86
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Dietrich CF, Mertens JC, Braden B et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of histologically proven liver hemangiomas. Hepatology 2007; 45: 1139-1145
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Dietrich CF, Braden B, Hocke M et al. Improved characterisation of solitary solid pancreatic tumours using contrast-enhanced transabdominal ultrasound. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2008; 134: 635-643
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Dietrich CF, Ignee A, Braden B et al. Improved differentiation of pancreatic tumors using contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008; 6: 590-597
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 D’Onofrio M, Barbi E, Dietrich CF et al. Pancreatic multicenter ultrasound study (PAMUS). Eur J Radiol 2011; DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.053.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 D’Onofrio M, Zamboni G, Tognolini A et al. Mass-forming pancreatitis: value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. World J Gastroenterol 2006; 12: 4181-4184
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Kersting S, Konopke R, Kersting F et al. Quantitative perfusion analysis of transabdominal contrast-enhanced ultrasonography of pancreatic masses and carcinomas. Gastroenterology 2009; 137: 1903-1911
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Ryschich E, Schmidt J, Loeffler T et al. Different radiogenic effects on microcirculation in healthy pancreas and in pancreatic carcinoma of the rat. Ann Surg 2003; 237: 515-521
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Ryschich E, Schmidt E, Maksan SM et al. Expansion of endothelial surface by an increase of vessel diameter during tumor angiogenesis in experimental and hepatocellular and pancreatic cancer. World J Gastroenterol 2004; 10: 3171-3174
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Schmidt J, Ryschich E, Daniel V et al. Vascular structure and microcirculation of experimental pancreatic carcinoma in rats. Eur J Surg 2000; 166: 328-335
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Makinen K, Loimas S, Nuutinen P et al. The growth pattern and microvasculature of pancreatic tumours induced with cultured carcinoma cells. Br J Cancer 2000; 82: 900-904
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 D’Onofrio M, Mansueto G, Falconi M et al. Neuroendocrine pancreatic tumor: value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. Abdom Imaging 2004; 29: 246-258
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Malago R, D’Onofrio M, Zamboni GA et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography of nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Am J Roentgenol 2009; 192: 424-430
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Mork H, Ignee A, Schuessler G et al. Analysis of neuroendocrine tumour metastases in the liver using contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. Scand J Gastroenterol 2007; 42: 652-662
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Dietrich CF, Hocke M, Gallotti A et al. Ultrasonography of the Pancreas. Italia: Springer-Verlag; 2012: 95-112
    Google Scholar
  • 25 D’Onofrio M, Megibow AJ, Faccioli N et al. Comparison of contrast-enhanced sonography and MRI in displaying anatomic features of cystic pancreatic masses. Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189: 1435-1442
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Beyer-Enke SA, Hocke M, Ignee A et al. Contrast-enhanced transabdominal ultrasound in the characterisation of pancreatic lesions with cystic appearance. JOP 2010; 11: 427-433
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Ripolles T, Martinez MJ, Lopez E et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the staging of acute pancreatitis. Eur Radiol 2010; 20: 2518-2523
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Hocke M, Ignee A, Dietrich CF. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis. Endoscopy 2011; 43: 163-165
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Dietrich CF, Ignee A, Frey H. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound with low mechanical index: a new technique. Z Gastroenterol 2005; 43: 1219-1223
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Becker D, Strobel D, Bernatik T et al. Echo-enhanced color- and power-Doppler EUS for the discrimination between focal pancreatitis and pancreatic carcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc 2001; 53: 784-789
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Bhutani MS, Hoffman BJ, van Velse A et al. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasonography with galactose microparticles: SHU508 A (Levovist). Endoscopy 1997; 29: 635-639
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Kitano M, Sakamoto H, Matsui U et al. A novel perfusion imaging technique of the pancreas: contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 67: 141-150
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Hocke M, Schulze E, Gottschalk P et al. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound in discrimination between focal pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer. World J Gastroenterol 2006; 12: 246-250
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Saftoiu A, Iordache SA, Gheonea DI et al. Combined contrast-enhanced power Doppler and real-time sonoelastography performed during EUS, used in the differential diagnosis of focal pancreatic masses (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72: 739-747
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 D’Onofrio M, Malago R, Zamboni G et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography better identifies pancreatic tumor vascularization than helical CT. Pancreatology 2005; 5: 398-402
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Faccioli N, D’Onofrio M, Malago R et al. Resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: depiction of tumoral margins at contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. Pancreas 2008; 37: 265-268
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Numata K, Ozawa Y, Kobayashi N et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography of pancreatic carcinoma: correlations with pathological findings. J Gastroenterol 2005; 40: 631-640
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Serra C, Menozzi G, Labate AMM et al. Ultrasound assessment of vascularization of the thickened terminal ileum wall in Crohn’s disease patients using a low-mechanical index real-time scanning technique with a second generation ultrasound contrast agent. Eur J Radiology 2007; 62: 114-121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Dietrich CF, Jenssen C. Evidenzbasierte Einsatzmöglichkeiten der Endosonografie (Evidence based endoscopic ultrasound. Z Gastoenterol 2011; 49: 599-621
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Dietrich CF, Jenssen C, Hocke M et al. Imaging of gastrointestinal stromal tumours with modern ultrasound techniques – A pictorial essay. Z Gastroenterol 2012; 50: 457-467
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Dietrich CF, Jedrzejczyk M, Ignee A. Sonographic assessment of splanchnic arteries and the bowel wall. Eur J Radiol 2007; 64: 202-212
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Gorg C, Faoro C, Bert T et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of splenic lymphoma involvement. Eur J Radiol 2011; 80: 169-174
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Catalano O, Sandomenico F, Matarazzo I et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography of the spleen. Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184: 1150-1156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Gorg C, Bert T. Second-generation sonographic contrast agent for differential diagnosis of perisplenic lesions. Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186: 621-626
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 von Herbay A, Barreiros AP, Ignee A et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography with SonoVue: differentiation between benign and malignant lesions of the spleen. J Ultrasound Med 2009; 28: 421-434
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Chiavaroli R, Grima P, Tundo P. Characterization of nontraumatic focal splenic lesions using contrast-enhanced sonography. J Clin Ultrasound 2011; 39: 310-315
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Catalano O, Lobianco R, Sandomenico F et al. Splenic trauma: evaluation with contrast-specific sonography and a second-generation contrast medium: preliminary experience. J Ultrasound Med 2003; 22: 467-477
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Valentino M, Serra C, Zironi G et al. Blunt abdominal trauma: emergency contrast-enhanced sonography for detection of solid organ injuries. Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186: 1361-1367
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Catalano O, Aiani L, Barozzi L et al. CEUS in abdominal trauma: multi-center study. Abdom Imaging 2009; 34: 225-234
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Correas JM, Claudon M, Tranquart F et al. The kidney: imaging with microbubble contrast agents. Ultrasound Q 2006; 22: 53-66
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Ignee A, Straub B, Schuessler G et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of renal masses. World J Radiol 2010; 2: 15-31
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Ignee A, Straub B, Brix D et al. The value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the characterisation of patients with renal masses. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 2010; 46: 275-290
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Quaia E, Bertolotto M, Cioffi V et al. Comparison of contrast-enhanced sonography with unenhanced sonography and contrast-enhanced CT in the diagnosis of malignancy in complex cystic renal masses. Am J Roentgenol 2008; 191: 1239-1249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Clevert DA, Minaifar N, Weckbach S et al. Multislice computed tomography versus contrast-enhanced ultrasound in evaluation of complex cystic renal masses using the Bosniak classification system. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 2008; 39: 171-178
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Park BK, Kim B, Kim SH et al. Assessment of cystic renal masses based on Bosniak classification: comparison of CT and contrast-enhanced US. Eur J Radiol 2007; 61: 310-314
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Mazziotti S, Zimbaro F, Pandolfo A et al. Usefulness of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the diagnosis of renal pseudotumors. Abdom Imaging 2010; 35: 241-245
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Bertolotto M, Martegani A, Aiani L et al. Value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for detecting renal infarcts proven by contrast-enhanced CT. A feasibility study. Eur Radiol 2008; 18: 376-383
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Dietrich CF, Ignee A, Barreiros AP et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for imaging of adrenal masses. Ultraschall in Med 2010; 31: 163-168
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Friedrich-Rust M, Glasemann T, Polta A et al. Differentiation between benign and malignant adrenal mass using contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Ultraschall in Med 2011; 32: 460-471
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Trojan J, Schwarz W, Sarrazin C et al. Role of ultrasonography in the detection of small adrenal masses. Ultraschall in Med 2002; 23: 96-100
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Schmid-Wendtner MH, Partscht K, Korting HC et al. Improved differentiation of benign and malignant lymphadenopathy in patients with cutaneous melanoma by contrast-enhanced color Doppler sonography. Arch Dermatol 2002; 138: 491-497
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Nakase K, Yamamoto K, Hiasa A et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound examination of lymph nodes in different types of lymphoma. Cancer Detect Prev 2006; 30: 188-191
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Hocke M, Menges M, Topalidis T et al. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound in discrimination between benign and malignant mediastinal and abdominal lymph nodes. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2008; 134: 473-480
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Jenssen C, Dietrich CF. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy and trucut biopsy in gastroenterology – An overview. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2009; 23: 743-759
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Cui XW, Ignee A, Braden B et al. Billiary papillomatosis and new ultrasound imaging modalities. Z Gastroenterol 2012; 50 (2) 50: 226-231
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar