Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Quantitative Analysis of the Time–Intensity Curve of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of the Liver: Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Liver Lesions
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Quantitative Analysis of the Time–Intensity Curve of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of the Liver: Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Liver Lesions
Do you wish to request the book?
Quantitative Analysis of the Time–Intensity Curve of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of the Liver: Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Liver Lesions
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Quantitative Analysis of the Time–Intensity Curve of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of the Liver: Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Liver Lesions
2021
Overview
Background: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of quantitative perfusion parameters in contrast-enhanced ultrasound to differentiate malignant from benign liver lesions. Methods: In this retrospective study 134 patients with a total of 139 focal liver lesions were included who underwent contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) between 2008 and 2018. All examinations were performed by a single radiologist with more than 15 years of experience using a second-generation blood pool contrast agent. The standard of reference was histopathology (n = 60), MRI or CT (n = 75) or long-term CEUS follow up (n = 4). For post processing regions of interests were drawn both inside of target lesions and the liver background. Time–intensity curves were fitted to the CEUS DICOM dataset and the rise time (RT) of contrast enhancement until peak enhancement, and a late-phase ratio (LPR) of signal intensities within the lesion and the background tissue, were calculated and compared between malignant and benign liver lesion using Student’s t-test. Quantitative parameters were evaluated with respect to their diagnostic accuracy using receiver operator characteristic curves. Both features were then combined in a logistic regression model and the cumulated accuracy was assessed. Results: RT of benign lesions (14.8 ± 13.8 s, p = 0.005), and in a subgroup analysis, particular hemangiomas (23.4 ± 16.2 s, p < 0.001) differed significantly to malignant lesions (9.3 ± 3.8 s). The LPR was significantly different between benign (1.59 ± 1.59, p < 0.001) and malignant lesions (0.38 ± 0.23). Logistic regression analysis with RT and LPR combined showed a high diagnostic accuracy of quantitative CEUS parameters with areas under the curve of 0.923 (benign vs. malignant) and 0.929 (hemangioma vs. malignant. Conclusions: Quantified CEUS parameters are helpful to differentiate malignant from benign liver lesions, in particular in case of atypical hemangiomas.
