Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Contrast-Enhanced Endoscopic Ultrasound (CE-EUS)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Diagnostic and Therapeutic Procedures in Gastroenterology

Part of the book series: Clinical Gastroenterology ((CG))

  • 1798 Accesses

Abstract

Blood-pool ultrasound contrast agents (UCSs) have the ability to image blood flow in soft tissues, which can be visualized at capillary level. Color Doppler has been integrated in EUS equipment since the introduction of electronic transducers and is able to visualize blood flow and its direction in small arteries and veins but not blood flow in capillaries or perfusion. Visualization of perfusion by contrast agents represents a new step in flow imaging and may separate hyper- and hypoperfused areas in tissue. This may be useful for tissue characterization and identification of tumors or abscesses or to guide intervention and tissue sampling.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Papadopoulou V, Tang MX, Balestra C, Eckersley RJ, Karapantsios TD. Circulatory bubble dynamics: from physical to biological aspects. Adv Colloid Interf Sci. 2014;206:239–49.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Ltd. DP. SonoVue 8 microlitres/ml, powder and solvent for dispersion for injection. medicines.org.uk; 2015.

  3. Sontum PC. Physicochemical characteristics of Sonazoid, a new contrast agent for ultrasound imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2008;34(5):824–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wang B, Zang WJ, Wang M, Ai H, Wang YW, Li YP, et al. Prolonging the ultrasound signal enhancement from thrombi using targeted microbubbles based on sulfur-hexafluoride-filled gas. Acad Radiol. 2006;13(4):428–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Karshafian R, Bevan PD, Williams R, Samac S, Burns PN. Sonoporation by ultrasound-activated microbubble contrast agents: effect of acoustic exposure parameters on cell membrane permeability and cell viability. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2009;35(5):847–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Piscaglia F, Bolondi L, Italian Society for Ultrasound in M, Biology Study Group on Ultrasound Contrast A. The safety of Sonovue in abdominal applications: retrospective analysis of 23188 investigations. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2006;32(9):1369–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Aggeli C, Giannopoulos G, Roussakis G, Christoforatou E, Marinos G, Toli C, et al. Safety of myocardial flash-contrast echocardiography in combination with dobutamine stress testing for the detection of ischaemia in 5250 studies. Heart. 2008;94(12):1571–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sonazoid, GE Healthcare [Internet]. Felleskatalogen A/S. 2016 [cited 15.03.2016]. Available from: http://www.daiichisankyo.com/media_investors/media_relations/press_releases/detail/005564.html.

  9. Landmark KE, Johansen PW, Johnson JA, Johansen B, Uran S, Skotland T. Pharmacokinetics of perfluorobutane following intravenous bolus injection and continuous infusion of sonazoid in healthy volunteers and in patients with reduced pulmonary diffusing capacity. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2008;34(3):494–501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hauben M, Hung EY, Hanretta KC, Bangalore S, Snow V. Safety of perflutren ultrasound contrast agents: a disproportionality analysis of the US FAERS database. Drug Saf. 2015;38(11):1127–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Postema M, Gilja OH. Ultrasound-directed drug delivery. Curr Pharm Biotechnol. 2007;8(6):355–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Postema M, Gilja OH. Contrast-enhanced and targeted ultrasound. World J Gastroenterol. 2011;17(1):28–41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Yu M, Liu Q, Song HP, Han ZH, Su HL, He GB, et al. Clinical application of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in diagnosis of superficial lymphadenopathy. J Ultrasound Med. 2010;29(5):735–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kanamori A, Hirooka Y, Itoh A, Hashimoto S, Kawashima H, Hara K, et al. Usefulness of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasonography in the differentiation between malignant and benign lymphadenopathy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101(1):45–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hocke M, Menges M, Topalidis T, Dietrich CF, Stallmach A. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound in discrimination between benign and malignant mediastinal and abdominal lymph nodes. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2008;134(4):473–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Vitali F, Hansen T, Kiesslich R, Heinrich S, Kumar A, Mildenberger P, et al. Frequency and characterization of benign lesions in patients undergoing surgery for the suspicion of solid pancreatic neoplasm. Pancreas. 2014;43(8):1329–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Dudekula A, Munigala S, Zureikat AH, Yadav D. Operative trends for pancreatic diseases in the USA: analysis of the nationwide inpatient sample from 1998-2011. J Gastrointest Surg:2016.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gillen S, Schuster T, Meyer Zum Buschenfelde C, Friess H, Kleeff J. Preoperative/neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of response and resection percentages. PLoS Med. 2010;7(4):e1000267.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Iordache S, Costache MI, Popescu CF, Streba CT, Cazacu S, Saftoiu A. Clinical impact of EUS elastography followed by contrast-enhanced EUS in patients with focal pancreatic masses and negative EUS-guided FNA. Med Ultrason. 2016;18(1):18–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Choi JH, Seo DW. The expanding role of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound in pancreatobiliary disease. Gut Liver. 2015;9(6):707–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Gong TT, Hu DM, Zhu Q. Contrast-enhanced EUS for differential diagnosis of pancreatic mass lesions: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;76(2):301–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Saftoiu A, Vilmann P, Dietrich CF, Iglesias-Garcia J, Hocke M, Seicean A, et al. Quantitative contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS in differential diagnosis of focal pancreatic masses (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;82(1):59–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ishikawa T, Itoh A, Kawashima H, Ohno E, Matsubara H, Itoh Y, et al. Usefulness of EUS combined with contrast-enhancement in the differential diagnosis of malignant versus benign and preoperative localization of pancreatic endocrine tumors. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;71(6):951–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yamashita Y, Kato J, Ueda K, Nakamura Y, Kawaji Y, Abe H, et al. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasonography for pancreatic tumors. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:491782.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Kitano M, Kudo M, Yamao K, Takagi T, Sakamoto H, Komaki T, et al. Characterization of small solid tumors in the pancreas: the value of contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107(2):303–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Havre RF, Odegaard S, Gilja OH, Nesje LB. Characterization of solid focal pancreatic lesions using endoscopic ultrasonography with real-time elastography. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2014;49(6):742–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Duell EJ, Lucenteforte E, Olson SH, Bracci PM, Li D, Risch HA, et al. Pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer risk: a pooled analysis in the International Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium (PanC4). Ann Oncol. 2012;23(11):2964–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Imazu H, Kanazawa K, Mori N, Ikeda K, Kakutani H, Sumiyama K, et al. Novel quantitative perfusion analysis with contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS for differentiation of autoimmune pancreatitis from pancreatic carcinoma. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2012;47(7):853–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gheonea DI, Streba CT, Ciurea T, Saftoiu A. Quantitative low mechanical index contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound for the differential diagnosis of chronic pseudotumoral pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer. BMC Gastroenterol. 2013;13:2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Hocke M, Cui XW, Domagk D, Ignee A, Dietrich CF. Pancreatic cystic lesions: the value of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound to influence the clinical pathway. Endosc Ultrasound. 2014;3(2):123–30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Kamata K, Kitano M, Omoto S, Kadosaka K, Miyata T, Yamao K, et al. Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography for differential diagnosis of pancreatic cysts. Endoscopy. 2016;48(1):35–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Seicean A, Badea R, Moldovan-Pop A, Vultur S, Botan EC, Zaharie T, et al. Harmonic contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasonography for the guidance of fine-needle aspiration in solid pancreatic masses. Ultraschall Med. 2015;

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hou X, Jin Z, Xu C, Zhang M, Zhu J, Jiang F, et al. Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: a retrospective study. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0121236.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Dayton PA, Pearson D, Clark J, Simon S, Schumann PA, Zutshi R, et al. Ultrasonic analysis of peptide- and antibody-targeted microbubble contrast agents for molecular imaging of alphavbeta3-expressing cells. Mol Imaging. 2004;3(2):125–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Pysz MA, Foygel K, Rosenberg J, Gambhir SS, Schneider M, Willmann JK. Antiangiogenic cancer therapy: monitoring with molecular US and a clinically translatable contrast agent (BR55). Radiology. 2010;256(2):519–27.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Bettinger T, Bussat P, Tardy I, Pochon S, Hyvelin JM, Emmel P, et al. Ultrasound molecular imaging contrast agent binding to both E- and P-selectin in different species. Investig Radiol. 2012;47(9):516–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Daeichin V, Akkus Z, Skachkov I, Kooiman K, Needles A, Sluimer J, et al. Quantification of bound microbubbles in ultrasound molecular imaging. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control. 2015;62(6):1190–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Kotopoulis S, Delalande A, Popa M, Mamaeva V, Dimcevski G, Gilja OH, et al. Sonoporation-enhanced chemotherapy significantly reduces primary tumour burden in an orthotopic pancreatic cancer xenograft. Mol Imaging Biol. 2014;16(1):53–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kotopoulis S, Dimcevski G, Gilja OH, Hoem D, Postema M. Treatment of human pancreatic cancer using combined ultrasound, microbubbles, and gemcitabine: a clinical case study. Med Phys. 2013;40(7):072902.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Delalande A, Kotopoulis S, Postema M, Midoux P, Pichon C. Sonoporation: mechanistic insights and ongoing challenges for gene transfer. Gene. 2013;525(2):191–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway

    Roald F. Havre

  2. Department of Gastroenterology, Research Center of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Craiova, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Craiova, Romania

    Adrian Saftoiu

  3. Department of Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition, Division of Internal Medicine, MD Anderson Center, Houston, TX, USA

    Manoop S. Bhutani

  4. GastroUnit, Herlev and Gentofte Hospitals, University of Copenhagen, Herlev Ringvej 75, Herlev, Denmark

    Peter Vilmann

Authors
  1. Roald F. Havre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adrian Saftoiu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Manoop S. Bhutani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Peter Vilmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roald F. Havre .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Advanced Endoscopy, Digestive Health Center, Section of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, USA

    Subbaramiah Sridhar

  2. Division of Gastroenterology-Hepatology, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut, USA

    George Y. Wu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Havre, R.F., Saftoiu, A., Bhutani, M.S., Vilmann, P. (2018). Contrast-Enhanced Endoscopic Ultrasound (CE-EUS). In: Sridhar, S., Wu, G. (eds) Diagnostic and Therapeutic Procedures in Gastroenterology. Clinical Gastroenterology. Humana Press, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62993-3_36

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62993-3_36

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-62991-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-62993-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation