Diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in mediastinal leiomyosarcoma mimicking aortic hematoma: A case report and review of literature

Transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) is the standard of care for haemodynamically-stable patients with blunt hepatic injury but it is sometimes impossible due to unfavourable vascular anatomies. This case report describes a 43-year-old male patient with abdominal pain following a motorcycle accident. Based on computed tomography (CT) findings, he was diagnosed with high-grade hepatic injury with coeliac axis stenosis (CAS) due to compression by the median arcuate ligament, and an aberrant right hepatic artery. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) demonstrated multiple high echogenic tubular and ovoid structures suggestive of active bleeding within the injured liver area. Angiography revealed unique interlobar and intrahepatic collateral vessels between the right and left hepatic arteries. Liver haemorrhages were also identified. Catheterization of the feeding arteries through the collateral pathway was unsuccessful, so a decision was made to cannulate the stenotic portion of the coeliac trunk with a 5-Fr Yashiro catheter. After several attempts, the microcatheter was successfully advanced coaxially into the common hepatic artery. Embolization was performed with a 1:2 mixture of N-butyl cyanoacrylate and iodized oil. Successful haemostasis was confirmed following TAE. CEUS helped clinicians identify active bleeding following traumatic solid organ injury. TAE was a safe and effective treatment strategy. Before performing TAE, attention should be given to the presence of CAS associated with compression by the median arcuate ligament.

Download Full-text

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of intrahepatic portal vein gas: Case report and review of literature

Radiology Case Reports ◽

10.1016/j.radcr.2021.04.056 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 (8) ◽

pp. 2151-2153

Author(s):

Tingting Sha ◽

Tinghui Yin ◽

Rongqin Zheng

Keyword(s):

Case Report ◽

Portal Vein ◽

Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound ◽

Review Of Literature ◽

Contrast Enhanced

Download Full-text

Diagnostic Value of Arrival Time Parametric Imaging Using Contrast‐Enhanced Ultrasonography in Superficial Enlarged Lymph Nodes

Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine ◽

10.1002/jum.14809 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 38 (5) ◽

pp. 1287-1298 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Shan‐shan Yin ◽

Qiu‐li Cui ◽

Zhi‐Hui Fan ◽

Wei Yang ◽

Kun Yan

Keyword(s):

Lymph Nodes ◽

Arrival Time ◽

Diagnostic Value ◽

Parametric Imaging ◽

Contrast Enhanced ◽

Arrival Time Parametric Imaging ◽

Contrast Enhanced Ultrasonography

Download Full-text

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of small cell carcinoma in urinary bladder: a case report and review of literature

BMC Cancer ◽

10.1186/s12885-017-3692-8 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 17 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Meixiang Zhang ◽

Chengcheng Niu ◽

Ming Zhang ◽

Qinghai Peng ◽

Minzhi Ouyang

Keyword(s):

Case Report ◽

Urinary Bladder ◽

Cell Carcinoma ◽

Small Cell Carcinoma ◽

Small Cell ◽

Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound ◽

Review Of Literature ◽

Contrast Enhanced

Download Full-text

Comparison of conventional, doppler and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in differential diagnosis of ovarian masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052830 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (12) ◽

pp. e052830

Author(s):

Lizhang Xun ◽

Lamei Zhai ◽

Hui Xu

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Ovarian Cancer ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Diagnostic Value ◽

Doppler Us ◽

Contrast Enhanced ◽

Contrast Enhanced Ultrasonography ◽

Sensitivity Specificity ◽

Ovarian Masses

ObjectivesTo assess the value of conventional, Doppler and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) (conventional ultrasonography (US), Doppler US and CEUS) for diagnosing ovarian cancer.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were conducted for studies published until October 2021.Eligibility criteriaStudies assessed the diagnostic value of conventional US, Doppler US or CEUS for detecting ovarian cancer, with no restrictions placed on published language and status.Data extraction and synthesisThe study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent authors. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (PLR and NLR), diagnostic OR (DOR) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were pooled using the bivariate generalised linear mixed model and random effects model.ResultsThe meta-analysis included 72 studies and involved 9296 women who presented with ovarian masses. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC for conventional US were 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87 to 0.94) and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.82 to 0.91), 6.87 (95% CI: 4.98 to 9.49) and 0.10 (95% CI: 0.07 to 0.15), 57.52 (95% CI: 36.64 to 90.28) and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.93 to 0.97), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC for Doppler US were 0.93 (95% CI: 0.91 to 0.95) and 0.85 (95% CI: 0.80 to 0.89), 6.10 (95% CI: 4.59 to 8.11) and 0.08 (95% CI: 0.06 to 0.11), 61.76 (95% CI: 39.99 to 95.37) and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.94 to 0.97), respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC for CEUS were 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92 to 0.99) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85 to 0.95), 11.47 (95% CI: 6.52 to 20.17) and 0.03 (95% CI: 0.01 to 0.09), 152.11 (95% CI: 77.77 to 297.51) and 0.99 (95% CI: 0.97 to 0.99), respectively. Moreover, the AUC values for conventional US (p=0.002) and Doppler US (p=0.005) were inferior to those of CEUS.ConclusionsConventional US, Doppler US and CEUS have a relatively high differential diagnostic value for differentiating between benign and malignant ovarian masses. The diagnostic performance of CEUS was superior to that of conventional US and Doppler US.

Download Full-text