Digestive diseases and sciences · 2014
Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography in the differential diagnosis of gallbladder wall thickening.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Imazu Hiroo, Mori Naoki, Kanazawa Keisuke, Chiba Masafumi, Toyoizumi Hirobumi, Torisu Yuichi, Koyama Seita, Hino Shoryoku, Ang Tiing Leong, Tajiri Hisao
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Differentiation of gallbladder (GB) carcinoma from benign GB wall thickening is challenging. The recent introduction of second-generation ultrasonic contrast agents has made contrast harmonic imaging with EUS possible. The aim of our study was to evaluate the utility of contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CH-EUS) for the differential diagnosis of GB wall thickening.
METHODS: Thirty-six consecutive patients with GB wall thickening imaged by CH-EUS and then underwent surgery were enrolled in this study. After the lesions were observed with conventional harmonic EUS (H-EUS), CH-EUS was performed with intravenous injection of 0.015 ml/kg of Sonazoid. Three reviewers with various levels of experience of EUS (Reviewer A: experienced endosonographer, B: EUS trainee, C: experienced gastroenterologist with expertise in transabdominal ultrasound but no EUS experience) were blinded to findings of recorded video of H-EUS and CH-EUS. The diagnostic accuracy of H-EUS and CH-EUS for malignant GB wall thickening was compared.
RESULTS: Final diagnoses based on surgical histology were GB carcinoma in 16, cholecystitis in 11, adenomyomatosis in 6 and cholesterolosis in 3. Overall sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for diagnosing malignant GB wall thickening of H-EUS and CH-EUS were 83.3 versus 89.6, 65 versus 98% (p < 0.001) and 73.1 versus 94.4% (p < 0.001). The inter-observer agreement for H-EUS was moderate (κ = 0.51), whereas that for CH-EUS was substantial (κ = 0.77). The inhomogeneous enhanced pattern on CH-EUS was a strong predictive factor of malignant GB wall thickening.
CONCLUSION: CH-EUS has the potential to improve the preoperative diagnostic accuracy and inter-observer agreement in the differential diagnosis of GB wall thickening.
METHODS: Thirty-six consecutive patients with GB wall thickening imaged by CH-EUS and then underwent surgery were enrolled in this study. After the lesions were observed with conventional harmonic EUS (H-EUS), CH-EUS was performed with intravenous injection of 0.015 ml/kg of Sonazoid. Three reviewers with various levels of experience of EUS (Reviewer A: experienced endosonographer, B: EUS trainee, C: experienced gastroenterologist with expertise in transabdominal ultrasound but no EUS experience) were blinded to findings of recorded video of H-EUS and CH-EUS. The diagnostic accuracy of H-EUS and CH-EUS for malignant GB wall thickening was compared.
RESULTS: Final diagnoses based on surgical histology were GB carcinoma in 16, cholecystitis in 11, adenomyomatosis in 6 and cholesterolosis in 3. Overall sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for diagnosing malignant GB wall thickening of H-EUS and CH-EUS were 83.3 versus 89.6, 65 versus 98% (p < 0.001) and 73.1 versus 94.4% (p < 0.001). The inter-observer agreement for H-EUS was moderate (κ = 0.51), whereas that for CH-EUS was substantial (κ = 0.77). The inhomogeneous enhanced pattern on CH-EUS was a strong predictive factor of malignant GB wall thickening.
CONCLUSION: CH-EUS has the potential to improve the preoperative diagnostic accuracy and inter-observer agreement in the differential diagnosis of GB wall thickening.