Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnosis value of focal liver lesions with SonoVue®-enhanced ultrasound compared with contrast-enhanced computed tomography and contrast-enhanced MRI: a meta-analysis

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purposes

This study is aimed at evaluating diagnostic value of focal liver lesions (FLLs) with SonoVue®-enhanced ultrasound compared with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CEMRI).

Methods

PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register were searched for English language articles published from January 2000 to May 2011. Histopathologic analysis and/or close clinical and imaging follow-up (except CECT or CEMRI) for at least 6 months were used as golden reference. Sensitivity, specificity, summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves, and area under the curve (AUC) were extracted to test heterogeneity.

Results

In 21 included studies, for the SonoVue®-enhanced ultrasound studies, sensitivity was 88% (95% CI 87–90), specificity was 81% (95% CI 79–84), and 38.62 (95% CI 13.64–109.35) for diagnostic odds ratio (DOR); for the CECT studies, sensitivity was 90% (95% CI 88–92), specificity was 77% (95% CI 71–82), and 30.84 (95% CI 11.11–85.61) for DOR; for the CEMRI studies, sensitivity was 86% (95% CI 83–88), specificity was 81% (95% CI 76–85), and 27.63 (95% CI 11.28–67.70) for DOR.

Conclusions

In comparison, SonoVue®-enhanced ultrasound had high pooled sensitivity and pooled specificity. SROC analysis showed the diagnostic value of FLLs with SonoVue®-enhanced ultrasound has no significant difference compared with CECT and CEMRI. SonoVue®-enhanced ultrasound is highly sensitive and specific in the characterization of FLLs to support an effective diagnostic method.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Basilico R, Blomley MJ, Harvey CJ, Filippone A, Heckemann RA, Eckersley RJ, Cosgrove DO (2002) Which continuous US scanning mode is optimal for the detection of vascularity in liver lesions when enhanced with a second generation contrast agent? Eur J Radiol 41:184–191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burns PN, Wilson SR (2007) Focal liver masses: enhancement patterns on contrast-enhanced images–concordance of US scans with CT scans and MR images. Radiology 242:162–174

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cabassa P, Bipat S, Longaretti L, Morone M, Maroldi R (2010) Liver metastases: sulphur hexafluoride-enhanced ultrasonography for lesion detection: a systematic review. Ultrasound Med Biol 10:1561–1567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Catala V, Nicolau C, Vilana R, Pages M, Bianchi L, Sanchez M, Bru C (2007) Characterization of focal liver lesions: comparative study of contrast-enhanced ultrasound versus spiral computed tomography. Eur Radiol 17:1066–1073

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chami L, Lassau N, Malka D, Ducreux M, Bidault S, Roche A, Elias D (2008) Benefits of contrast-enhanced sonography for the detection of liver lesions: comparison with histologic findings. AJR 190:683–690

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cho CS, Curran S, Schwartz LH, Kooby DA, Klimstra DS, Shia J, Munoz A, Fong Y, Jarnagin WR, DeMatteo RP, Blumgart LH (2008) Preoperative radiographic assessment of hepatic steatosis with histologic correlation. J Am Coll Surg 206:480–488

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cieszanowski A, Szeszkowski W, Golebiowski M, Bielecki DK, Grodzicki M, Pruszynski B (2002) Discrimination of benign from malignant hepatic lesions based on their T2-relaxation times calculated from moderately T2-weighted turbo SE sequence. Eur Radiol 12:2273–2279

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Cosgrove D (2007) Achieving optimal diagnostic yield through the use of real-time contrast enhanced ultrasonography. Eur Radiol 17(Suppl 6):F71–F72

    Google Scholar 

  • Dai Y, Chen MH, Fan ZH, Yan K, Yin SS, Zhang XP (2008) Diagnosis of small hepatic nodules detected by surveillance ultrasound in patients with cirrhosis: comparison between contrast-enhanced ultrasound and contrast-enhanced helical computed tomography. Hepatol Res 38:281–290

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • de Groot MC, van Zwieten-Boot BJ, van Grootheest AC (2004) Severe adverse reactions after the use of sulphur hexafluoride (SonoVue) as an ultrasonographic contrast agent. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 148:1887–1888

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deville′ WL, Bezemer PD, Bouter LM (2000) Publications ondiagnostic test evaluation in family medicine journals: an optimal search strat-egy. J Clin Epidemiol 53:65–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donati OF, Hany TF, Reiner CS, von Schulthess GK, Marincek B, Seifert B, Weishaupt D (2010) Value of retrospective fusion of PET and MR images in detection of hepatic metastases: comparison with 18F-FDG PET/CT and Gd-EOB-DTPA–enhanced MRI. J Nucl Med 51(5):692–699

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • D’souza MM, Sharma R, Mondal A, Jaimini A, Tripathi M, Saw SK, Singh D, Mishra A, Tripathi RP (2009) Prospective evaluation of CECT and 18F-FDG-PET/CT in detection of hepatic metastases. Nucl Med Commun 30:117–125

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC (2003) The comparison of proportions from several independent samples: estimation of the marginal mean pro-portion. In: Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC (eds) Statistical methods for rates and proportions, 3rd edn. Wiley, New Jersey, pp 212–217

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1982) The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 143:29–36

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327:557–560

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Irwig L, Tosteson AN, Gatsonis C, Lau J, Colditz G, Chalmers TC, Mosteller F (1994) Guidelines for meta-analysis evaluating diagnostic tests. Ann Intern Med 120:667–676

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kong G, Jackson C, Koh DM, Lewington V, Sharma B, Brown G, Cunningham D, Cook GJ (2008) The use of 18F-FDG PET/CT in colorectal liver metastases–comparison with CT and liver MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 07:1323–1329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konopke R, Bunk A, Kersting S (2007) The role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for focal liver lesion detection: an overview. Ultrasound Med Biol 33:1515–1526

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Krix M, Kiessling F, Essig M, Herth F, Karcher A, Le-Huu M, Kauczor HU, Delorme S (2004) Low mechanical index contrast-enhanced ultrasound better reflects high arterial perfusion of liver metastases than arterial phase computed tomography. Invest Radiol 39:216–222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lee MG, Auh YH, Cho KS, Chung YH, Lee IC, Kang EM (1996) Color Doppler flow imaging of hepatocellular carcinomas. Comparison with metastatic tumors and hemangiomas by three-step grading for color hues. Clin Imaging 20:199–203

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leen E, Becker D, Bolondi L, Steinbach R, Weskott H, Stacul F, Ricci P (2003) Prospective, open-label, multi-centre study evaluating the accuracy of unenhanced versus SonoVue enhanced ultrasonography in the characterization of focal liver lesions. Ultrasound Med Biol 29:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lencioni R, Cioni D, Crocetti L, Donati F, Franchini C, Giusti S, Bartolozzi C (2002) Ultrasound imaging of focal liver lesions with a second-generation contrast agent. Acad Radiol 9(Suppl 2):S371–S374

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lencioni R, Della Pinna C, Crocetti L, Bozzi E, Cioni D (2007) Clinical management of focal liver lesions: the key role of real time contrast-enhanced US. Eur Radiol 17(Suppl 6):F73–F79

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Luo BM, Wen YL, Yang HY, Zhi H, Ou B, Ma JH, Pan JS, Dai XN (2005) Differentiation between malignant and benign nodules in the liver: use of contrast C3-MODE technology. World J Gastroenterol 11:2402–2407

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B (1993) Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: dataanalytic ap-proaches and some additional considerations. Stat Med 12:1293–1316

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolau C, Vilana R, Catalá V, Bianchi L, Gilabert R, García A, Brú C (2006) Importance of evaluating all vascular phases on contrast-enhanced sonography in the differentiation of benign from malignant focal liver lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:158–167

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pan L, Han Y, Sun X, Liu J, Gang H (2010) FDG-PET and other imaging modalities for the evaluation of breast cancer recurrence and metastases: a meta-analysis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 07:1007–1022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parikh T, Drew SJ, Lee VS, Wong S, Hecht EM, Babb JS, Taouli B (2008) Focal liver lesion detection and characterization with diffusion-weighted MR imaging: comparison with standard breath-hold T2-weighted imaging. Radiology 246:812–822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pirovano G, Vanzulli A, Marti-Bonmati L, Grazioli L, Manfredi R, Greco A, Holzknecht N, Daldrup-Link HE, Rummeny E, Hamm B, Arneson V, Imperatori L, Kirchin MA, Spinazzi A (2000) Evaluation of the accuracy of gadobenate dimeglumine–enhanced MR imaging in the detection and characterization of focal liver lesions. AJR 75:1111–1120

    Google Scholar 

  • Quaia E, D’Onofrio M, Palumbo A, Rossi S, Bruni S, Cova M (2006) Comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography versus baseline ultrasound and contrast-enhanced computed tomography in metastatic disease of the liver: diagnostic performance and confidence. Eur Radiol 16:1599–1609

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Quaia E, Alaimo V, Baratella E, Medeot A, Midiri M, Cova MA (2009) The added diagnostic value of 64-row multidetector CT combined with contrast-enhanced US in the evaluation of hepatocellular nodule vascularity implications in the diagnosis of malignancy in patients with liver cirrhosis. Eur Radiol 19:651–663

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Regge D, Campanella D, Anselmetti GC, Cirillo S, Gallo TM, Muratore A, Capussotti L, Galatola G, Floriani I, Aglietta M (2006) Diagnostic accuracy of portal-phase CT and MRI with mangafodipir trisodium in detecting liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Clin Radiol 61:338–347

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Reinhold C, Hammers L, Taylor CR, Quedens-Case CL, Holland CK, Taylor KJ (1995) Characterization of focal hepatic lesions with duplex sonography: findings in 198 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 164:1131–1135

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Romanini L, Passamonti M, Aiani L, Cabassa P, Raieli G, Montermini I, Martegani A, Grazioli L, Calliada F (2007) Economic assessment of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for evaluation of focal liver lesions: a multicentre Italian experience. Eur Radiol 17:99–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seitz K, Strobel D, Bernatik T, Blank W, Friedrich-Rust M, Herbay A, Dietrich CF, Strunk H, Kratzer W, Schuler A (2009) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) for the characterization of focal liver lesions—prospective comparison in clinical practice: CEUS vs. CT (DEGUM multicenter trial). Parts of this manuscript were presented at the Ultrasound Dreiländertreffen 2008, Davos. Ultraschall Med 30:383–389

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Seitz K, Bernatik T, Strobel D, Blank W, Friedrich-Rust M, Strunk H, Greis C, Kratzer W, Schuler A (2010) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) for the characterization of focal liver lesions in clinical practice (DEGUM Multicenter Trial): CEUS vs. MRI–a prospective comparison in 269 patients. Ultraschall in Med 31:492–499

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sodhi KS, Sidhu R, Gulati M, Saxena A, Suri S, Chawla Y (2005) Role of tissue harmonic imaging in focal hepatic lesions: comparison with conventional sonography. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 20:1488–1493

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Strobel D, Seitz K, Blank W, Schuler A, Dietrich C, von Herbay A, Friedrich-Rust M, Kunze G, Becker D, Will U, Kratzer W, Albert FW, Pachmann C, Dirks K, Strunk H, Greis C, Bernatik T (2008) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the characterization of focal liver lesions–diagnostic accuracy in clinical practice (DEGUM multicenter trial). Ultraschall in Med 29:499–505

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki S, Iijima H, Moriyasu F, Sasaki S, Yanagisawa K, Miyahara T, Oguma K, Yoshida M, Horibe T, Ito N, Kakizaki D, Abeb K, Tsuchiya K (2004) Differential diagnosis of hepatic nodules using delayed parenchymal phase imaging of Levovist contrast ultrasound: comparative study with SPIO-MRI. Hepatol Res 29:122–126

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tateishi U, Hasegawa T, Muramatsu Y, Moriyama N (2003) Hepatic metastases of soft tissue angiosarcoma: CT and MR imaging findings. Abdom Imaging 28:660–664

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Torzilli G (2005) Adverse effects associated with SonoVue use. Expert Opin Drug Saf 4:399–401

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tranquart F, Correas JM, Ladam Marcus V, Manzoni P, Vilgrain V, Aube C, Elmaleh A, Chami L, Claudon M, Cuilleron M, Diris B, Garibaldi F, Lucidarme O, Marion D, Beziat C, Rode A, Tasu JP, Trillaud H, Bleuzen A, Le Gouge A, Giraudeau B, Rusch E (2009) Real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the evaluation of focal liver lesions: diagnostic efficacy and economical issues from a French multicentric study. J Radiol 90:109–122

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang ZL, Tang J, Weskott HP, Li JL, Wang W, Luo YK, An LC, Xu JH (2008) Undetermined focal liver lesions on gray-scale ultrasound in patients with fatty liver: characterization with contrast-enhanced ultrasound. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 23:1511–1519

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J (2003) The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 3:25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Whiting PF, Weswood ME, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PN, Kleijnen J (2006) Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMCMed Res Methodol 6:9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson SR, Burns PN (2006) An algorithm for the diagnosis of focal liver masses using microbubble contrast-enhanced pulse-inversion sonography. Am J Roentgenol 186:1401–1412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu W, Chen MH, Yin SS, Yan K, Fan ZH, Yang W, Dai Y, Huo L, Li JY (2006) The role of contrast-enhanced sonography of focal liver lesions before percutaneous biopsy. AJR 87:752–761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu PJ, Yan FH, Wang JH, Shan Y, Ji Y, Chen CZ (2010) Contribution of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the characterization of hepatocellular carcinomas and dysplastic nodules in cirrhotic liver. J Comput Assist Tomogr 34(04):506–512

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, Khan K, Coomarasamy A (2006) Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol 6:31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zheng YL, Yin XY, Xie XY, Xu HX, Xu ZF, Liu GJ, Liang JY, Lu MD (2010) Value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in assessing the vascularity of liver metastases: comparison with contrast-enhanced computed tomography. J Ultrasound Med 29(10):1403–1410

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that can inappropriately influence our work, there is no professional or other personal interest of any nature or kind in any product, service and/or company that could be construed as influencing the position presented in, or the review of, the manuscript entitled, “Diagnosis Value of Focal Liver Lesions with SonoVue®-Enhanced Ultrasound Compared with Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography, Contrast-Enhanced MRI: A Meta-Analysis”.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ultrasound, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, No. 36 Sanhao Street, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, China

    Yang Guang, LiMei Xie, AiLu Cai & Ying Huang

  2. Department of Public Health, China Medical University, Shenyang, China

    Hailong Ding

Authors
  1. Yang Guang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. LiMei Xie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hailong Ding
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. AiLu Cai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ying Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yang Guang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Guang, Y., Xie, L., Ding, H. et al. Diagnosis value of focal liver lesions with SonoVue®-enhanced ultrasound compared with contrast-enhanced computed tomography and contrast-enhanced MRI: a meta-analysis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 137, 1595–1605 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-011-1035-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-011-1035-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation