Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the liver: technical and lexicon recommendations from the ACR CEUS LI-RADS working group

  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is a specific form of ultrasound imaging performed with intravenous administration of microbubble contrast agents. It has been extensively used for liver tumor characterization and was recently added to the American College of Radiology Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (CEUS LI-RADS). This paper describes technical recommendations for successful liver CEUS lesion characterization, and provides imaging protocol and Lexicon of imaging findings.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. World Health Organization (2012) GLOBOCAN 2012: estimated cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide in 2017. http://globocan.iarc.fr/Pages/fact_sheets_cancer.aspx

  2. Mitchell DG, Bruix J, Sherman M, Sirlin CB (2015) LI-RADS (liver imaging reporting and data system): summary, discussion, and consensus of the LI-RADS management working group and future directions. Hepatology. 61:1056–1065

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Heimbach J, Kulik LM, Finn R, et al. (2017) AASLD guidelines for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.29086

    Google Scholar 

  4. Vilana R, Forner A, Bianchi L, et al. (2010) Intrahepatic peripheral cholangiocarcinoma in cirrhosis patients may display a vascular pattern similar to hepatocellular carcinoma on contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Hepatology 51(6):2020–2029

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Li R, Yuan MX, Ma KS, et al. (2014) Detailed analysis of temporal features on contrast enhanced ultrasound may help differentiate intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis. PLoS ONE 9(5):e98612

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Wildner D, Bernatik T, Greis C, et al. (2015) CEUS in hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma in 320 patients - early or late washout matters: a subanalysis of the DEGUM multicenter trial. Ultraschall Med 36(2):132–139

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ishak K, Baptista A, Bianchi L, et al. (1995) Histological grading and staging of chronic hepatitis. J Hepatol 22:696–699

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Park YN (2011) Update on precursor and early lesions of hepatocellular carcinomas. Arch Pathol Lab Med 135:704–715

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Coleman WB (2003) Mechanisms of human hepatocarcinogenesis. Curr Mol Med. 3:573–588

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. International Working Party (1995) Terminology of nodular hepatocellular lesions. Hepatology 22:983–993

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Roskams T, Kojiro M (2010) Pathology of early hepatocellular carcinoma: conventional and molecular diagnosis. Semin Liver Dis. 30:17–25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Trevisani F, Cantarini MC, Wands JR, Bernardi M (2008) Recent advances in the natural history of hepatocellular carcinoma. Carcinogenesis 29:1299–1305

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chou CT, Chou JM, Chang TA, et al. (2013) Differentiation between dysplastic nodule and early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: the utility of conventional MR imaging. World J Gastroenterol 19:7433–7439

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Jha RC, Mitchell DG, Weinreb JC, et al. (2014) LI-RADS categorization of benign and likely benign findings in patients at risk of hepatocellular carcinoma: a pictorial atlas. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:48–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Choi J-Y, Lee J-M, Sirlin CB (2014) CT and MR imaging diagnosis and staging of hepatocellular carcinoma. Part II. Extracellular agents, hepatobiliary agents, and ancillary imaging features. Radiology 273:30–50

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Han J, Liu Y, Han F, et al. (2015) The degree of contrast washout on contrast-enhanced ultrasound in distinguishing intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma. Ultrasound Med Biol 41(12):3088–3095

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wildner D, Pfeifer L, Goertz RS, et al. (2014) Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound (DCE-US) for the characterization of hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocellular carcinoma. Ultraschall Med 35(6):522–527

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS). http://www.acr.org/quality-safety/resources/LIRADS

  19. Kono Y, Cosgrove D, Dietrich C, et al. (2016) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound liver imaging reporting and data system for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: initial proposal. J Ultrasound Med 35(suppl):S1–S132

    Google Scholar 

  20. Jang HJ, Kono Y, Sirlin C, et al. (2015) Incorporation of CEUS Into LI-RADS for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): a work in progress. Radiological Society of North America Annual Meeting. 29 November–4 December 2015, Chicago, IL. GI212-ED-X

  21. Piscaglia F, Wilson SR, Lyshchik A, et al. (2017) American college of radiology contrast enhanced ultrasound liver imaging reporting and data system (CEUS LI-RADS) for the diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: a pictorial essay. Ultraschall Med. 38:320–324

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Heimbach J, Kulik LM, Finn R, et al. (2017) AASLD guidelines for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.29086

    Google Scholar 

  23. OPTN Policy #9: allocation of livers and liver-intestines. https://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/media/1200/optn_policies.pdf

  24. Claudon M, Dietrich CF, Choi BI, et al. (2012) A WFUMB-EFSUMB initiative in cooperation with representatives of AFSUMB, AIUM, ASUM, FLAUS and ICUS. Ultrasound Med Biol 2013(39):187–210

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sawhney S, Wilson SR (2017) Can ultrasound with contrast enhancement replace nonenhanced computed tomography scans in patients with contraindication to computed tomography contrast agents? Ultrasound Q 33:125–132

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Jang HJ, Kim TK, Burns PN, Wilson SR (2015) CEUS: an essential component in a multimodality approach to small nodules in patients at high-risk for hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Radiol 84:1623–1635

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hanna RF, Miloushev VZ, Tang A, et al. (2016) Comparative 13-year meta-analysis of the sensitivity and positive predictive value of ultrasound, CT, and MRI for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma. Abdom Radiol (NY) 41:71–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Exuzides A, Main ML, Colby C, et al. (2010) A retrospective comparison of mortality in critically ill hospitalized patients undergoing echocardiography with and without an ultrasound contrast agent. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 3:578–585

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Goldberg YH, Ginelli P, Siegel R, et al. (2012) Administration of perflutren contrast agents during transthoracic echocardiography is not associated with a significant increase in acute mortality risk. Cardiology 122(2):119–125

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Aggeli C, Giannopoulos G, Roussakis G, et al. (2008) Safety of myocardial flash-contrast echocardiography in combination with dobutamine stress testing for the detection of ischaemia in 5250 studies. Heart 94:1571–1577

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Parker JM, Weller MW, Feinstein LM, et al. (2013) Safety of ultrasound contrast agents in patients with known or suspected cardiac shunts. Am J Cardiol 1(112):1039–1045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Jo PC, Jang HJ, Burns PN, et al. (2017) Integration of Contrast-enhanced US into a multimodality approach to imaging of nodules in a cirrhotic liver: how i do it. Radiology 282:317–331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. EFSUMB (2010) Minimum training requirements for the practice of medical ultrasound in Europe. Ultraschall in Med 31:426–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. ACR manual on contrast media. https://www.acr.org/~/media/37D84428BF1D4E1B9A3A2918DA9E27A3.pdf

  35. Main ML, Hibberd MG, Ryan A, et al. (2014) Acute mortality in critically ill patients undergoing echocardiography with or without an ultrasound contrast agent. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 7:40–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Parker JM, Weller MW, Feinstein LM, et al. (2013) Safety of ultrasound contrast agents in patients with known or suspected cardiac shunts. Am J Cardiol 112:1039–1045

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Main ML, Ryan AC, Davis TE, et al. (2008) 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. 102:1742–1746

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Wei K, Mulvagh SL, Carson L, et al. (2008) The safety of deFinity and Optison for ultrasound image enhancement: a retrospective analysis of 78,383 administered contrast doses. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 21:1202–1206

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Herzog CA (2008) Incidence of adverse events associated with use of perflutren contrast agents for echocardiography. JAMA 299:2023–2025

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/Drugs/CardiovascularandRenalDrugsAdvisoryCommittee/UCM252880.pdf

  41. Muskula PR, Main ML (2017) Safety With echocardiographic contrast agents. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.116.005459

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Lumason prescribing information. http://imaging.bracco.com/sites/braccoimaging.com/files/technica_sheet_pdf/us-en-2017-01-04-spc-lumason.pdf

  43. Definity prescribing information. http://www.definityimaging.com/pdf/DEFINITY_US_PI_515987-0117.pdf

  44. Yu H, Jang HJ, Kim TK, et al. (2010) Pseudo-enhancement within local ablation zone of hepatic tumors due to nonlinear artifact on contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Am J Roentgenol 194:653–659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Dietrich CF, Ignee A, Greis C, et al. (2014) Artifacts and pitfalls in contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the liver. Ultraschall Med 35(2):108–125

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Li SY, Huang P, Cosgrove D, et al. (2016) Pseudoenhancement of gallbladder sludge: a confusing artifact caused by nonlinear propagation of ultrasound through microbubbles. Ultraschall Med 37(3):307–309

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Fowler KJ, Potretzke TA, Hope TA, Costa EA, Wilson SR (2017) LI-RADS M (LR-M): definite or probable malignancy, not specific for hepatocellular carcinoma. Abdom Radiol (NY). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-017-1196-2

    Google Scholar 

  48. Hanna RF, Aguirre DA, Kased N, et al. (2008) Cirrhosis-associated hepatocellular nodules: correlation of histopathologic and MR imaging features. Radiographics 28:747–769

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to dedicate this manuscript to our dear friend Dr. David Cosgrove (1938–2017). David was a thought leader in the clinical ultrasound and a passionate advocate of CEUS. He was one of the founding members of the CEUS LI-RADS Working Group and spent countless hours working on this project. His extraordinary knowledge, enthusiasm, and dedication were extremely valuable and will be greatly missed. Supported in part by NCI Grant R01 CA215520-01A1.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, 132 S. 10th Street, 763G Main Bldg, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA

    Andrej Lyshchik

  2. Departments of Medicine and Radiology, University of California, San Diego, USA

    Yuko Kono

  3. Department of Internal Medicine 2, Caritas-Krankenhaus Bad Mergentheim, Bad Mergentheim, Germany

    Christoph F. Dietrich

  4. Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Hyun-Jung Jang & Tae Kyoung Kim

  5. Unit of Internal Medicine, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Fabio Piscaglia

  6. Department of Radiology, University of California, San Diego, USA

    Alexander Vezeridis

  7. Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, USA

    Juergen K. Willmann

  8. Division of Gastroenterology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada

    Stephanie R. Wilson

Authors
  1. Andrej Lyshchik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yuko Kono
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christoph F. Dietrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hyun-Jung Jang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tae Kyoung Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Fabio Piscaglia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Alexander Vezeridis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Juergen K. Willmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Stephanie R. Wilson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrej Lyshchik.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Conflict of interest

Andrej Lyshchik: Research support: GE, Siemens, Toshiba; Advisory Board: Bracco; Speaker: GE, SonoScape. Yuko Kono: Research support: Toshiba, GE, Lantheus. Christoph F Dietrich: Advisory Board; Hitachi, Mindray, JAZZ. Speaker: Hitachi, Supersonic, Siemens, Mindray, GE, Bracco, Pentax, Novartis. Hyun-Jung Jang: none. Tae Kyoung Kim: none. Fabio Piscaglia: Research support: Esaote; Advisory Board: Bayer, Eisai; Speaker: Bracco, Bayer. Alexander Vezeridis: none. Juergen K Willmann: Research support: Siemens, GE, Philips, Bracco; Consulting: Bracco, Triple Ring Technologies; Advisory Board: Lantheus, Bracco, SonoVol. Stephanie R Wilson: Research support: Siemens, Philips and Samsung; Speaker: GE and Samsung

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lyshchik, A., Kono, Y., Dietrich, C.F. et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the liver: technical and lexicon recommendations from the ACR CEUS LI-RADS working group. Abdom Radiol 43, 861–879 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-017-1392-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-017-1392-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation