Abdominal Imaging

, Volume 29, Issue 6, pp 669–681 | Cite as

Liver metastases in cancer: detection with contrast-enhanced ultrasonography

  • J. Hohmann
  • T. Albrecht
  • A. Oldenburg
  • J. Skrok
  • K.-J. Wolf
Invited update


In patients with known or suspected malignancy, ultrasonography (US) is often the first choice for liver imaging because of its widespread availability and low cost. Compared with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the sensitivity of conventional US for detecting hepatic metastases is relatively poor. The advent of microbubble contrast agents changed this situation. Sensitivity and specificity increased substantially with the use of these contrast agents and contrast-specific imaging modes in recent years. Currently, numerous US imaging methods exist, based on Doppler techniques or harmonic imaging. They exploit the complex nonlinear behavior of microbubbles in a sound field to achieve marked augmentation of the US signal. Although microbubble contrast agents are essentially blood pool agents, some have a hepatosplenic specific late phase. Imaging during this late phase is particularly useful for improving the detection of malignant liver lesions and allows US to perform similarly to spiral CT as shown by recent studies. In addition, this late phase imaging is very helpful for lesion characterization. Low mechanical index imaging with the newer perfluor agents permits real-time imaging of the dynamic contrast behavior during the arterial, portal venous, and late phases and is particularly helpful for lesion characterization. The use of US for hemodynamic studies of the liver transit time may detect blood flow changes induced by micrometastases even before they become visible on imaging. In this field of functional imaging, further research is required to achieve conclusive results, which are not yet available.

Ultrasonography Microbubbles Contrast agents Metastases Detection 


  1. 1.
    Robinson, PJ 2000Imaging liver metastases: current limitations and future prospectsBr J Radiol73234241PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cosgrove, DO 2001

    Malignant liver disease

    Meire, HBCosgrove, DODewbury, KCFarrant, P eds. Clinical ultrasound: a comprehensive text. 2nd edChurchill LivingstoneLondon211231
    Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Karhunen, PJ 1986Benign hepatic tumours and tumour like conditions in menJ Clin Pathol39183188PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Edmunson, HA, Craig, JR 1987

    Neoplasms of the liver

    Schiff, LSchiff, ER eds. Diseases of the liver. 8th edLippincottPhiladelphia11091158
    Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jones, EC, Chezmar, JL, Nelson, RC,  et al. 1992The frequency and significance of small (less than or equal to 15 mm) hepatic lesions detected by CTAJR158535539PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kreft, B, Pauleit, D, Bachmann, R,  et al. 2001Häufigkeit und Bedeutung von kleinen fokalen LeberläsionenRofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr173424429CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wernecke, K, Rummeny, E, Bongartz, G,  et al. 1991Detection of hepatic masses in patients with carcinoma: comparative sensitivities of sonography, CT, and MR imagingAJR157731739PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Clarke, MP, Kane, RA, Steele, G,Jr,  et al. 1989Prospective comparison of preoperative imaging and intraoperative ultrasonography in the detection of liver tumorsSurgery106849855PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ohlsson, B, Tranberg, KG, Lundstedt, C,  et al. 1993Detection of hepatic metastases in colorectal cancer: a prospective study of laboratory and imaging methodsEur J Surg159275281PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yarmenitis, SD, Kalogeropoulou, CP, Hatjikondi, O,  et al. 2000An experimental approach of the Doppler perfusion index of the liver in detecting occult hepatic metastases: histological findings related to the hemodynamic measurements in Wistar ratsEur Radiol10417424CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Blomley, MJ, Albrecht, T, Cosgrove, DO,  et al. 1998Liver vascular transit time analyzed with dynamic hepatic venography with bolus injections of an US contrast agent: early experience in seven patients with metastasesRadiology209862866PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Parkin, A, Robinson, PJ, Baxter, P,  et al. 1983Liver perfusion scintigraphy—method, normal range and laparotomy correlation in 100 patientsNucl Med Commun4395402Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leveson, SH, Wiggins, PA, Giles, GR,  et al. 1985Deranged liver blood flow patterns in the detection of liver metastasesBr J Surg72128130PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bang, N, Nielsen, MB, Rasmussen, AN,  et al. 2001Hepatic vein transit time of an ultrasound contrast agent: simplified procedure using pulse inversion imagingBr J Radiol74752755PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Harvey, CJ, Albrecht, T 2001Ultrasound of focal liver lesionsEur Radiol1115781593Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nisenbaum, H, Rowling, S 1995Ultrasound of focal hepatic lesionsSemin Roentgenol30324346PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gebel, M, Caselitz, M, Manns, M 1997Sonographische Diagnostik von Raumforderungen der LeberInternist38901907CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kinkel, K, Lu, Y, Both, M,  et al. 2002Detection of hepatic metastases from cancers of the gastrointestinal tract by using noninvasive imaging methods (US, CT, MR imaging, PET): a meta-analysisRadiology224748756PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Albrecht, T, Hoffmann, CW, Schmitz, SA,  et al. 2001Phase-inversion sonography during the liver-specific late phase of contrast enhancement: improved detection of liver metastasesAJR17611911198PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wernecke, K, Rummeny, E, Bongartz, G,  et al. 1991Detection of hepatic masses in patients with carcinoma: comparative sensitivities of sonography, CT, and MR imagingAJR157731739PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hann, LE, Bach, AM, Cramer, LD 1999Hepatic sonography: comparison of tissue harmonic and standard sonography techniquesAJR173201206PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shapiro, RS, Wagreich, J, Parsons, RB 1998Tissue harmonic imaging sonography: evaluation of image quality compared to conventional sonographyAJR17112031206PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Burns, PN, Wilson, SR, Simpson, DH 2000Pulse inversion imaging of liver blood flow: improved method for characterizing focal masses with microbubble contrastInvest Radiol355871Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hann, LE, Bach, AM, Cramer, LD,  et al. 1999Hepatic sonography: comparison of tissue harmonic and standard sonography techniquesAJR173201206PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tanaka, S, Oshikawa, O, Sasaki, T,  et al. 2000Evaluation of tissue harmonic imaging for the diagnosis of focal liver lesionsUltrasound Med Biol26183187CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Koito, K, Namieno, T, Morita, K 1998Differential diagnosis of small hepatocellular carcinoma and adenomatous hyperplasia with power Doppler sonographyAJR170157161PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    van Erkel, AR, Pijl, ME, van den Berg-Huysmans, AA,  et al. 2002Hepatic metastases in patients with colorectal cancer: relationship between size of metastases, standard of reference, and detection ratesRadiology224404409PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Choi, BI, Han, JK, Song, IS,  et al. 1991Intraoperative sonography of hepatocellular carcinoma: detection of lesions and validity in surgical resectionGastrointest Radiol16329333PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schmidt, J, Strotzer, M, Fraunhofer, S,  et al. 2000Intraoperative ultrasonography versus helical computed tomography and computed tomography with arterioportography in diagnosing colorectal liver metastases: lesion-by-lesion analysisWorld J Surg244348CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Soyer, P, Levesque, M, Elias, D 1992Detection of liver metastases from colorectal cancer: comparison of intraoperative US and CT portographyRadiology183541544PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ward, J, Chen, F, Guthrie, JA,  et al. 2000Hepatic lesion detection after superparamagnetic iron oxide enhancement: comparison of five T2-weighted sequences at 1.0 T by using alternative-free response receiver operating characteristic analysisRadiology214159166PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Luck, AJ, Maddern, GJ 1999Intraoperative abdominal ultrasonographyBr J Surg86516CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Clarke, MP, Kane, RA, Steele, DG,  et al. 1989Prospective comparison of preoperative imaging and intraoperative ultrasonography in the detection of liver tumorsSurgery106849855PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Conlon, R, Jacobs, M, Dasgupta, D,  et al. 2003The value of intraoperative ultrasound during hepatic resection compared with improved preoperative magnetic resonance imagingEur J Ultrasound16211216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hunerbein, M, Rau, B, Hohenberger, P,  et al. 2001[Value of laparoscopic ultrasound for staging of gastrointestinal tumours]Chirurgie72914919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Leen E, Ceccotti P, MacQuarrie J, et al. Preliminary report on contrast-enhanced intra-operative US in the detection of liver metastases: an essential investigation before resection? Presented before the general assembly of the Radiological Society of North American; 2003Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Leggett, DA, Kelly, BB, Bunce, IH,  et al. 1997Colorectal cancer: diagnostic potential of CT measurements of hepatic perfusion and implications for contrast enhancement protocolsRadiology205716720PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Leen, E, Angerson, WJ, Wotherspoon, H,  et al. 1995Detection of colorectal liver metastases: comparison of laparotomy, CT, US, and Doppler perfusion index and evaluation of postoperative follow-up resultsRadiology195113116PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Leen, E, Goldberg, JA, Angerson, WJ,  et al. 2000Potential role of Doppler perfusion index in selection of patients with colorectal cancer for adjuvant chemotherapyLancet3553437CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Fowler, RC, Harris, KM, Swift, SE,  et al. 1998Hepatic Doppler perfusion index: measurement in nine healthy volunteersRadiology209867871PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Albrecht, T, Blomley, MJ, Cosgrove, DO,  et al. 1999Non-invasive diagnosis of hepatic cirrhosis by transit time analysis of an ultrasound contrast agentLancet35315791583CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Albrecht, T, Blomley, MJ, Cosgrove, DO,  et al. 1999Transit-time studies with Levovist in patients with and without hepatic cirrhosis: a promising new diagnostic toolEur Radiol9S377S381CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ernst, H, Hahn, EG, Balzer, T,  et al. 1996Color Doppler ultrasound of liver lesions: signal enhancement after intravenous injection of the ultrasound contrast agent LevovistJ Clin Ultrasound243135CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Angeli, E, Carpanelli, R, Crespi, G,  et al. 1994Efficacy of SH U 508 A (Levovist) in color Doppler ultrasonography of hepatocellular carcinoma vascularizationRadiol Med (Torino)872431Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Schlief, R 1996Developments in echo enhancing agentsClin Radiol5157PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hauff, P, Fritzsch, T, Reinhardt, M,  et al. 1997Delineation of experimental liver tumors in rabbits by a new ultrasound contrast agent and stimulated acoustic emissionInvest Radiol329499CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bauer, A, Blomley, M, Leen, E,  et al. 1999Liver-specific imaging with SHU 563A: diagnostic potential of a new class of ultrasound contrast mediaEur Radiol9349352CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kono, Y, Steinbach, GC, Peterson, T,  et al. 2002Mechanism of parenchymal enhancement of the liver with a microbubble-based US contrast medium: an intravital microscopy study in ratsRadiology224253257PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    de Jong, N (1997) In: Nanda, NC, Schlief, R, Goldberg, BB (eds.) Advances in echo imaging using contrast enhancement, 2nd ed. Netherlands: Kluwer, 139–64Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Forsberg, F 1997

    Physics of ultrasound contrast agents

    Goldberg, BB eds. Ultrasound contrast agentsMartin Dunitz, Ltd.London919
    Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Uhlendorf, V, Hoffmann, C 1994Non-linear acoustic response of coated microbubbles in diagnostic ultrasoundProc IEEE Ultrasound Symp4015591562Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Bauer, A, Mahler, M, Urbank, A, et al. (1997) Microvascular imaging: results from a phase 1 study of the novel polymeric contrast agent SHU 563 A. In: Nanda, NC, Schlief, R, Goldberg, BB (eds.) Advances in echo imaging using contrast enhancement, 2nd ed. Kluwer, Netherlands, :685–690Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Albrecht, T, Blomley, MJ, Heckemann, RA,  et al. 2000[Stimulated acoustic emissions with the ultrasound contrast medium Levovist: a clinically useful contrast effect with liver-specific properties]Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr1726167CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Bryant, TH, Blomley, MJ, Albrecht, T,  et al. 2003Liver phase uptake of the microbubble SH U 508A improves characterisation of liver lesions: a multi-center studyRadiology...Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Hohmann, J, Skrok, J, Puls, R,  et al. 2003[Characterization of focal liver lesions with contrast-enhanced low MI real time ultrasound and SonoVue]Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr175835843CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Harvey, CJ, Blomley, MJ, Eckersley, RJ,  et al. 2000Hepatic malignancies: improved detection with pulse-inversion US in late phase of enhancement with SH U 508A-early experienceRadiology216903908PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Dalla Palma, L, Bertolotto, M, Quaia, E,  et al. 1999Detection of liver metastases with pulse inversion harmonic imaging: preliminary resultsEur Radiol9382387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Albrecht, T, Blomley, MJ, Burns, PN,  et al. 2003Improved detection of hepatic metastases with pulse-inversion US during the liver-specific phase of SHU 508A: multicenter studyRadiology227361370PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hoffmann, CW, Albrecht, T, Schmitz, SA,  et al. 2001[Comparison of contrast enhanced PIUS and dual phase spiral-CT in the detection of liver metastases with IOUS correlation]Rofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr17379CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Skjoldbye, B, Pedersen, MH, Struckmann, J,  et al. 2002Improved detection and biopsy of solid liver lesions using pulse-inversion ultrasound scanning and contrast agent infusionUltrasound Med Biol28439444CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Albrecht, T, Blomley, M, Goldberg, B,  et al. 2000[Detection of focal liver lesion with the new RES-specific echo contrast agent NC100100: results of an explorative multicenter study]Ultraschall Med2124Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Hohmann
    • 1
  • T. Albrecht
    • 1
  • A. Oldenburg
    • 1
  • J. Skrok
    • 1
  • K.-J. Wolf
    • 1
  1. 1.Klinik und Poliklinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin und Humboldt Universität zu BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations