Skip to main content

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 809 Accesses

Abstract

One can find many published studies on the use of second-generation ultrasound contrast media (UCM) for kidney disease, but in recent years there have been an increasing number of publications regarding applications for other organs: the kidney, small intestine, pancreas, testes, and prostate [1]. The reason for this shift is in the unique chemical and physical characteristics of the contrast medium employed, which in this case is comprised of sulphur hexafluoride microbubbles with a diameter of 2–5 μm. Because of their size, once introduced into the blood stream they cannot be diffused into extravascular spaces. Thus, they take on similar characteristics to blood-pool contrast media, with the difference that they can pass through the pulmonary alveolar-capillary membrane and therefore be disposed of primarily through the respiratory process. This means of elimination makes second-generation CM recommendable for patients with renal disease for the lack of nephrotoxicity in the microbubbles [2]. Another feature of second-generation CM is the very low incidence of allergic reactions compared to gadolinium-based or iodinated CM. Currently, its use is indicated as unsafe in cases of: recent heart attack (<7 days), right to left shunt, severe pulmonary hypertension, pregnancy, lactation, or severe cardiac disease (III/IV class) [3]. In the execution of a contrast-enhanced ultrasound, one can make use of a wide range of software original to the apparatus. The current most frequently used technique is that referred to as conservative, or non-destructive: the acoustic pressure applied does not cause the microbubbles to burst, but uses non-linear oscillation to generate the echo amplification of the ultrasound signal. The pressure is measured by the mechanical index (MI). The conservative method uses a low MI, in contrast with the past use of the destructive method, in which the amplified ultrasound signal was achieved, after having broken the microbubbles, by employing a raised MI with the intensity of the signal with a shorter duration [2, 4].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Claudon M, Cosgrove D, Albrecht T et al (2008) Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), update 2008. Ultraschall Med 29:28–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Quaia E (2007) Microbubble ultrasound contrast agents: an update. Eur Radiol 17:1995–2008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Prakash A, Tan GJ, Wansaicheong GK (2011) Contrast enhanced ultrasound of kidneys. Pictorial essay. Med Ultrason 13:150–156

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wilson SR, Burns PN (2010) Microbubble-enhanced US in body imaging: what role? Radiology 257:24–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Siracusano S, Bertolotto M, Ciciliato S et al (2011) The current role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) imaging in the evaluation of renal pathology. World J Urol 29:633–638

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Setola SV, Catalano O, Sandomenico F, Siani A (2007) Contrast-enhanced sonography of the kidney. Abdom Imaging 32:21–28

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Siracusano S, Quaia E, Bertolotto M et al (2004) The application of ultrasound contrast agents in the characterization of renal tumors. World J Urol 22:316–322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Valentino M, Serra C, Zironi G et al (2006) Blunt abdominal trauma: emergency contrast-enhanced sonography for detection of solid organ injuries. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1361–1367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giovanni Regine .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Regine, G., Atzori, M., Fabbri, R. (2013). Introduction. In: Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of the Urinary Tract. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-5432-5_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-5432-5_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-5430-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-5432-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics