Advertisement

Abdominal Radiology

, Volume 44, Issue 2, pp 559–567 | Cite as

Double contrast-enhanced ultrasound improves the detection and localization of occult lesions in the pancreatic tail: a initial experience report

  • Wei Zhu
  • Gang Mai
  • Xiang ZhouEmail author
  • Bin Song
Article

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study is to review our initial experience of Double contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (DCEUS) in the preoperative detection of pancreatic tail occult tumors.

Methods

Thirty-five patients were recruited to undergo DCEUS of the pancreas suspected by occult lesions of pancreatic with MRI or clinical evidence. The radiologists assessed the images (conventional US, DCEUS, and MRI) for enhancement phases, tumor presence, location, enhancement characteristics, and tumor conspicuity. The differences in the onset times of the phases between DCEUS and MRI were noted. Tumor conspicuity was graded on a four-point scale for conspicuity comparison among three imaging modalities.

Results

Pancreatic tail tumors were missed on conventional transabdominal US in 11 of 35 patients. DCEUS revealed 12 lesions of 35 patients. Pancreatic tail tumors were identified on MRI in 10 of 35 patients. The sensitivity and specificity of DCEUS for depicting occult lesions of ≤ 2.2 cm were 92% and 95%, respectively. In contrast, the sensitivity and specificity of conventional US were 67% and 66%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of MRI were 91% and 88%, respectively. The conspicuity ratings of the three phases did not significantly differ between the DCEUS and MRI groups (P > 0.05). The DCEUS phases started much earlier than the corresponding MRI phases.

Conclusion

DCEUS is a promising technique in the detection of occult pancreatic tail tumors and is possibly superior to dynamic enhanced MRI in the case of some peripheral lesions.

Keywords

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound Contrast-enhanced MRI Double contrast-enhanced ultrasound Pancreatic tail tumor 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

We declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Bipat S, Phoa SS, van Zeldan OM (2005) Ultrasonography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis and determining respectability of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 29:438–445CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Morgan KA, Adams DB (2010) Solid tumors of the body and tail of the pancreas. Surg Clin N Am 90:287–307CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    D’Onofrio M, Gallotti A, Pozzi Mucelli R (2010) Imaging techniques in pancreatic tumors. Expert Rev Med Devices 7(2):257–273CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rumack C, Wilson SR, Charboneau JW (1991) Diagnostic ultrasound. Maryland Heights: Mosby Inc, pp 145–177Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shiyan L, Pintong H, Zongmin W, et al (2009) The relationship between enhanced intensity and microvessel density of gastric carcinoma using double contrast- enhanced ultrasonography. Ultrasound Med Biol 35:1086–1091CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhuang H, Yang ZG, Wang ZQ, et al (2012 Apr) Features of time-intensity curve parameters of colorectal adenocarcinomas evaluated by double-contrast enhanced ultrasonography: initial observation. Eur J Radiol 81(4):677–682CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sidhu PS, Cantisani V, Dietrich CF, et al (2018) The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations for the clinical practice of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in non-hepatic applications: update 2017 (Long Version). Ultraschall Med. 39(2):e2–e44CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kalra MK, Maher MM, Mueller PR, Saini S (2003) State-of-the-art imaging of pancreatic neoplasms. Br J Radiol 76:857–865CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sahani DV, Shah ZK, Catalano OA, Boland GW, Brugge WR (2008) Radiology of pancreatic adenocarcinoma, current status of imaging. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 23:23–33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kartalis N, Lindholm TL, Aspelin P, Permert J, Albiin N (2009) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of pancreas tumours. Eur Radiol 19(8):1981–1990CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cantisani V, Mortele KJ, Levy A, et al (2003) MR imaging features of solid-pseudopapillary tumor of the pancreas in adult and pediatric patients. AJR 181:395–401CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fletcher JG, Wiersema MJ, Farrell MA, et al (2003) Pancreatic malignancy, value of arterial, pancreatic, and hepatic phase imaging with multi-detector row CT. Radiology 229:81–90CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kitano M, Kudo M, Maekawa K, et al (2004) Dynamic imaging of pancreatic diseases by contrast enhanced coded phase inversion harmonic ultrasonography. Gut 53:854–859CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Itoh T, Hirooka Y, Itoh A, et al (2005) Usefulness of contrast-enhanced transabdominal ultrasonography in the diagnosis of intraductal papillary mucinous tumors of the pancreas. Am J Gastroenterol 100:144–152CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Owen NJ, Sohaib SA, Peppercorn PD, et al (2001) MRI of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Br J Radiol 74:968–973CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thoeni RF, Mueller-lisse UG, Do NK, Shyn PB (2000) Dectection of small, fuctional islet cell tumors in the pancreas: selection of MR imaging sequences for optimal sensitivity. Radiology 214:483–490CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    D’Onofrio M, Zamboni G, Faccioli N, Capelli P, Pozzi Mucelli R (2007) Ultrasonography of the pancreas. 4. Contrast-enhanced imaging. Abdom Imaging 32:171–181CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhou Xiang, Liu Ji-Bin, Luo Yan, et al (2010) Characterization of focal liver lesions by means of assessment of hepatic transit time with contrast-enhanced US. Radiology 256:648–655CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhou Xiang, Luo Yan, Peng Yu-Lan, et al (2011) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound feature of hepatic perfusion disorder related to focal liver lesions: a correlation study with contrast-enhanced CT. Radiology 260:274–281CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Echo Lab of Cardiology, Department/Department of Ultrasound, West China HospitalSichuan UniversityChengduChina
  2. 2.Department of Hepatobiliopancreatic Surgery, West China HospitalSichuan UniversityChengduChina
  3. 3.Department of Interventional Radiology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical CollegeBeijingChina
  4. 4.Radiology Department, West China HospitalSichuan UniversityChengduChina

Personalised recommendations