Help
Subscribe


GastroHep.com - the global online resource for all aspects of gastroenterology, hepatology and endoscopy

 24 June 2018

Advanced search
GastroHep.com - the global online resource for all aspects of gastroenterology, hepatology and endoscopy Profile of Roy Pounder

Home

News  
Journals
Review Articles
Slide Atlas
Video Clips
Online Books
Advanced Digestive Endoscopy
Classical Cases
Conference Diary
PubMed
International GH Links
USA GH Links
National GH Links
National GI Societies
Other Useful Links




Emails on Gastroenterology and Hepatology
the National AIDS Treatment Advocacy Project
Visit the gastroenterology section of the EUMS

News

Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the differential diagnosis of liver cancer

A study in the latest issue of the European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology compares the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound algorithms for the differential diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma.

News image

Dr Barbara Schellhaas compared 2 contrast-enhanced ultrasound algorithms for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in high-risk patients, including Erlanger Synopsis of Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound for Liver lesion Assessment in Patients at Risk (ESCULAP) and American College of Radiology Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound-Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System.

Focal liver lesions in 100 high-risk patients were assessed using both contrast-enhanced ultrasound algorithms for a direct comparison.

The team categorized lesions according to size and contrast enhancement in the arterial, portal venous and late phases.

For the definite diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma, categories ESCULAP-4, ESCULAP-Tr and ESCULAP-V and contrast-enhanced ultrasound-LI-RADS-LR-5, LR-Tr and LR-5-V were compared.

The diagnostic accuracy for intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma was identical with both algorithms
European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology

In addition, contrast-enhanced ultrasound-LI-RADS-category LR-M, and ESCULAP-category C were compared.

Histology, ontrast-enhanced-computed tomography and ontrast-enhanced-MRI served as reference standards.

The researchers found that the reference standard among 100 lesions included 87 hepatocellular carcinomas, 6 intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinomas and 7 non-hepatocellular carcinoma-non-intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma-lesions.

For the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma, the team noted that the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound was significantly higher with ESCULAP versus contrast-enhanced ultrasound-LI-RADS.

The researchers observed that the sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value and negative predictive value for ESCULAP/contrast-enhanced ultrasound-LI-RADS were 94%/72%; 62%/69%; 94%/94%; and 62%/27%, respectively.

The diagnostic accuracy for intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma was identical with both algorithms, with higher positive predictive value for ESCULAP-C versus LR-M.

Dr Schellhaas' team concludes, "Contrast-enhanced ultrasound-based algorithms contribute toward standardized assessment and reporting of hepatocellular carcinoma-suspect lesions in high-risk patients."

"ESCULAP shows significantly higher diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and negative predictive value with no loss of specificity compared with contrast-enhanced ultrasound-LI-RADS."

"Both algorithms have an excellent positive predictive value."

"Arterial hyperenhancement is the key feature for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma with contrast-enhanced ultrasound."

"Washout should not be a necessary prerequisite for the diagnosis of definite hepatocellular carcinoma."

"Contrast-enhanced ultrasound-LI-RADS in its current version is inferior to ESCULAP for the noninvasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma."

"There are 2 ways to improve contrast-enhanced ultrasound-LI-RADS, including the combination of the categories LR-4 and LR-5 for the diagnosis of definite hepatocellular carcinoma, and the use of subtotal infiltration of a liver lobe as an additional feature."

Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017: 29(9): 1036–1044
04 September 2017

Go to top of page Email this page Email this page to a colleague

 31 May 2018 
Diagnostic for NAFLD  
 31 May 2018 
Bile acids and the risks for hepatotoxicity
 31 May 2018 
Rectal cancer female sexuality score
 30 May 2018 
Fungal dysbiosis in cirrhosis
 30 May 2018 
Placebo rates in ulcerative colitis trials
 30 May 2018 
Follow-up testing and colorectal cancer mortality
 29 May 2018 
Organ transplantation donors
 29 May 2018 
Novel therapies for IBD
 29 May 2018 
Helicobacter pylori infection to stomach cancer
 28 May 2018 
Mesalazine in ulcerative colitis
 28 May 2018 
Technology and management of digestive diseases
 28 May 2018 
Therapeutic strategies for HCV
 25 May 2018 
Post‐operative complications in elderly IBD
 25 May 2018 
Technology to increase colorectal cancer screening
 25 May 2018 
Colorectal cancer–specific mortality
 24 May 2018 
Alcohol consumption and outcomes in drug-induced liver injury
 24 May 2018 
Patient-reported outcome measures in IBD trials
 24 May 2018 
Precision medicine for tumors
 23 May 2018 
Management of perianal fistulas in Crohn’s disease
 23 May 2018 
Cardiovascular risk in diabetes mellitus with NAFLD
 23 May 2018 
High body mass index is and ulcerative colitis
 22 May 2018 
Worldwide H.pylori prevalence
 22 May 2018 
PPI and risk of stroke
 22 May 2018 
Online tool predicts bowel dysfunction severity prior to anterior resection
 21 May 2018 
PPI use and cognitive decline
 21 May 2018 
Depressive symptoms in IBD youth
 21 May 2018 
Fecal incontinence and quality of life in IBD
 18 May 2018 
Esophageal dilatation in clinical practice 
 17 May 2018 
IBD and later extraintestinal manifestations
 17 May 2018 
Repeat stool DNA testing
 17 May 2018 
IBS and chronic fatigue following GI infection
 16 May 2018 
Factors associated with fecal incontinence
 16 May 2018 
Diagnostic delay in Crohn's disease
 16 May 2018 
Cardiovascular risk in diabetes mellitus with NAFLD
 15 May 2018 
Guidelines for management of Crohn's
 15 May 2018 
New therapies for CDI
 15 May 2018 
Hep B in the Grey Zone
 14 May 2018 
Blood test for the diagnosis of fibrotic NASH
 14 May 2018 
Outcomes at bariatric centers of excellence
 14 May 2018 
Management of perianal fistulas in Crohn’s
 11 May 2018 
Detection of undiagnosed celiac disease
 11 May 2018 
Alcohol consumption and drug-induced liver injury
 10 May 2018 
Colorectal cancer screening
 10 May 2018 
Fibrosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B
 09 May 2018 
Fecal incontinence
 09 May 2018 
Health problems and IBS
 09 May 2018 
Esophageal dilatation in clinical practice 
 07 May 2018 
Health problems and IBS
 07 May 2018 
Assessment of diminutive colorectal polyps
 07 May 2018 
Omitting antibiotics in uncomplicated acute diverticulitis
 04 May 2018 
National Institutes of Health workshop and obesity
 04 May 2018 
Factors associated with fecal incontinence
 04 May 2018 
Colorectal cancer screening and ethnic inequities
 03 May 2018 
Gastrointestinal ultrasound in IBD
 03 May 2018 
Ultransonography in postsurgical recurrence in Crohn's
 02 May 2018 
Chronic Hep B
 02 May 2018 
Hep C antiviral treatment and liver cancer risk
 02 May 2018 
Symptom assessment in cirrhotic ascites
 01 May 2018 
Interferon‐free regimens in Hep C
 01 May 2018 
European guidelines on pancreatic cystic neoplasms

Blackwell Publishing


GastroHep.com is a Blackwell Publishing registered trademark
© 2018 Wiley-Blackwell and GastroHep.com and contributors
Privacy Statement
Disclaimer
About Us