BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Radiology (2008) 81, 881-889
© 2008 British Institute of Radiology
doi: 10.1259/bjr/22318475
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by CHEN, L-D
Right arrow Articles by LIN, M-X
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by CHEN, L-D
Right arrow Articles by LIN, M-X
British Journal of Radiology 81 (2008),881-889 ©2008 The British Institute of Radiology

Full paper

Enhancement patterns of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: comparison between contrast-enhanced ultrasound and contrast-enhanced CT

L-D CHEN, MD 1 H-X XU, MD, PhD 1 X-Y XIE, MD, PhD 1 M-D LU, MD, DMSc 2 Z-F XU, MD 1 G-J LIU, MD 1 J-Y LIANG, MD 1 and M-X LIN, MD 1

Departments of 1 Medical Ultrasonics and 2 Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China

Correspondence: Hui-Xiong Xu, Department of Medical Ultrasonics, The First Affiliated Hospital, Institute for the Study of Diagnostic and Interventional Ultrasound, Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, China. E-mail: xuhuixiong{at}hotmail.com

The aim of this study was to compare the enhancement pattern of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) on contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with that on contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT). 40 pathologically proven ICC lesions in 40 patients were evaluated retrospectively with both CEUS and CECT. The enhancement level and pattern in the dynamic phases on both CEUS and CECT were analysed. The diagnostic results of CEUS and CECT before pathological examination were also recorded. During arterial phases, the number of lesions that appeared as (i) peripheral irregular rim-like hyperenhancement, (ii) diffuse heterogeneous hyperenhancement, (iii) diffuse homogeneous hyperenhancement and (iv) diffuse heterogeneous hypoenhancement were 19 (47.5%), 9 (22.5%), 5 (12.5%) and 7 (17.5%), respectively, on CEUS, and 22 (55.0%), 3 (7.5%), 2 (5.0%) and 13 (32.5%), respectively, on CECT (p = 0.125). In the portal phase, the number of lesions showing hyperenhancement and hypoenhancement were 1 (2.5%) and 39 (97.5%), respectively, on CEUS, and 15 (37.5%) and 25 (62.5%) on CECT (p = 0.0001). CEUS made a correct diagnosis in 32 (80.0%) lesions before pathological examination; CECT made a correct diagnosis in 27 (67.5%) lesions (p = 0.18). In conclusion, the enhancement patterns of ICC on CEUS were consistent with those on CECT in the arterial phase, whereas in the portal phase ICC faded out more obviously on CEUS than on CECT. CEUS had the same accuracy as CECT in diagnosing ICCs, and so can be used as a new modality for the characterization of ICC.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 2008 by the British Institute of Radiology.