Quantitative contrast-enhanced US helps differentiating neoplastic vs non-neoplastic gallbladder polyps

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To differentiate between large (≥ 1 cm in diameter) gallbladder (GB) non-neoplastic and neoplastic polyps using quantitative analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) findings. Methods: From September 2017 to May 2018, 29 patients (10 males; median age, 63 years) with GB polyps of ≥ 1 cm in diameter who were undergoing cholecystectomy were consecutively enrolled. All patients underwent preoperative conventional US and CEUS examinations. Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings using time-intensity curves between the two groups was independently performed by two radiologists. The interobserver agreement for the quantitative analysis of the CEUS results was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of CEUS examination. Results: After the cholecystectomy, the patients were classified into the non-neoplastic polyp group (n = 12) and the neoplastic polyp group (n = 17) according to the pathological results. The interobserver agreement for quantitative assessment between the two radiologists was near perfect to substantial. Quantitative assessment of the CEUS findings revealed that the rise time, mean transit time, time to peak, and fall time of non-neoplastic GB polyps were significantly shorter than those of neoplastic polyps (p < 0.001, p = 0.008, p = 0.013, and p = 0.002, respectively). The sensitivity and specificity of the quantitative CEUS parameters for the differentiation between the two groups were 76.5–100% and 75%, respectively, with an area under the curve of 0.765–0.887. Conclusions: Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings could be valuable in differentiating GB neoplastic polyps from non-neoplastic polyps. Key Points: • Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings could be valuable in differentiating gallbladder neoplastic polyps from non-neoplastic polyps. • Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings in gallbladder polyps provides cut-off values for differentiation between neoplastic polyps and non-neoplastic polyps with near-perfect to substantial interobserver agreement.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3772-3781
Number of pages10
JournalEuropean Radiology
Volume29
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jul 2019

Fingerprint

Polyps
Gallbladder
Cholecystectomy
ROC Curve
Area Under Curve

Keywords

  • Contrast media
  • Gallbladder
  • Polyps
  • Ultrasonography

Cite this

@article{8f649de18a574adc840b5c7ad02cfbbb,
title = "Quantitative contrast-enhanced US helps differentiating neoplastic vs non-neoplastic gallbladder polyps",
abstract = "Objectives: To differentiate between large (≥ 1 cm in diameter) gallbladder (GB) non-neoplastic and neoplastic polyps using quantitative analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) findings. Methods: From September 2017 to May 2018, 29 patients (10 males; median age, 63 years) with GB polyps of ≥ 1 cm in diameter who were undergoing cholecystectomy were consecutively enrolled. All patients underwent preoperative conventional US and CEUS examinations. Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings using time-intensity curves between the two groups was independently performed by two radiologists. The interobserver agreement for the quantitative analysis of the CEUS results was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of CEUS examination. Results: After the cholecystectomy, the patients were classified into the non-neoplastic polyp group (n = 12) and the neoplastic polyp group (n = 17) according to the pathological results. The interobserver agreement for quantitative assessment between the two radiologists was near perfect to substantial. Quantitative assessment of the CEUS findings revealed that the rise time, mean transit time, time to peak, and fall time of non-neoplastic GB polyps were significantly shorter than those of neoplastic polyps (p < 0.001, p = 0.008, p = 0.013, and p = 0.002, respectively). The sensitivity and specificity of the quantitative CEUS parameters for the differentiation between the two groups were 76.5–100{\%} and 75{\%}, respectively, with an area under the curve of 0.765–0.887. Conclusions: Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings could be valuable in differentiating GB neoplastic polyps from non-neoplastic polyps. Key Points: • Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings could be valuable in differentiating gallbladder neoplastic polyps from non-neoplastic polyps. • Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings in gallbladder polyps provides cut-off values for differentiation between neoplastic polyps and non-neoplastic polyps with near-perfect to substantial interobserver agreement.",
keywords = "Contrast media, Gallbladder, Polyps, Ultrasonography",
author = "Bae, {Jae Seok} and Kim, {Se Hyung} and Kang, {Hyo jin} and Haeryoung Kim and Ryu, {Ji Kon} and Jin-Young Jang and Lee, {Sang Hyub} and Paik, {Woo Hyun} and Kwon, {Woo Il} and Lee, {Jae Young} and Han, {Joon Koo}",
year = "2019",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00330-019-06123-w",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "3772--3781",
journal = "European radiology",
issn = "0938-7994",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quantitative contrast-enhanced US helps differentiating neoplastic vs non-neoplastic gallbladder polyps

AU - Bae, Jae Seok

AU - Kim, Se Hyung

AU - Kang, Hyo jin

AU - Kim, Haeryoung

AU - Ryu, Ji Kon

AU - Jang, Jin-Young

AU - Lee, Sang Hyub

AU - Paik, Woo Hyun

AU - Kwon, Woo Il

AU - Lee, Jae Young

AU - Han, Joon Koo

PY - 2019/7/1

Y1 - 2019/7/1

N2 - Objectives: To differentiate between large (≥ 1 cm in diameter) gallbladder (GB) non-neoplastic and neoplastic polyps using quantitative analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) findings. Methods: From September 2017 to May 2018, 29 patients (10 males; median age, 63 years) with GB polyps of ≥ 1 cm in diameter who were undergoing cholecystectomy were consecutively enrolled. All patients underwent preoperative conventional US and CEUS examinations. Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings using time-intensity curves between the two groups was independently performed by two radiologists. The interobserver agreement for the quantitative analysis of the CEUS results was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of CEUS examination. Results: After the cholecystectomy, the patients were classified into the non-neoplastic polyp group (n = 12) and the neoplastic polyp group (n = 17) according to the pathological results. The interobserver agreement for quantitative assessment between the two radiologists was near perfect to substantial. Quantitative assessment of the CEUS findings revealed that the rise time, mean transit time, time to peak, and fall time of non-neoplastic GB polyps were significantly shorter than those of neoplastic polyps (p < 0.001, p = 0.008, p = 0.013, and p = 0.002, respectively). The sensitivity and specificity of the quantitative CEUS parameters for the differentiation between the two groups were 76.5–100% and 75%, respectively, with an area under the curve of 0.765–0.887. Conclusions: Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings could be valuable in differentiating GB neoplastic polyps from non-neoplastic polyps. Key Points: • Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings could be valuable in differentiating gallbladder neoplastic polyps from non-neoplastic polyps. • Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings in gallbladder polyps provides cut-off values for differentiation between neoplastic polyps and non-neoplastic polyps with near-perfect to substantial interobserver agreement.

AB - Objectives: To differentiate between large (≥ 1 cm in diameter) gallbladder (GB) non-neoplastic and neoplastic polyps using quantitative analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) findings. Methods: From September 2017 to May 2018, 29 patients (10 males; median age, 63 years) with GB polyps of ≥ 1 cm in diameter who were undergoing cholecystectomy were consecutively enrolled. All patients underwent preoperative conventional US and CEUS examinations. Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings using time-intensity curves between the two groups was independently performed by two radiologists. The interobserver agreement for the quantitative analysis of the CEUS results was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of CEUS examination. Results: After the cholecystectomy, the patients were classified into the non-neoplastic polyp group (n = 12) and the neoplastic polyp group (n = 17) according to the pathological results. The interobserver agreement for quantitative assessment between the two radiologists was near perfect to substantial. Quantitative assessment of the CEUS findings revealed that the rise time, mean transit time, time to peak, and fall time of non-neoplastic GB polyps were significantly shorter than those of neoplastic polyps (p < 0.001, p = 0.008, p = 0.013, and p = 0.002, respectively). The sensitivity and specificity of the quantitative CEUS parameters for the differentiation between the two groups were 76.5–100% and 75%, respectively, with an area under the curve of 0.765–0.887. Conclusions: Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings could be valuable in differentiating GB neoplastic polyps from non-neoplastic polyps. Key Points: • Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings could be valuable in differentiating gallbladder neoplastic polyps from non-neoplastic polyps. • Quantitative analysis of CEUS findings in gallbladder polyps provides cut-off values for differentiation between neoplastic polyps and non-neoplastic polyps with near-perfect to substantial interobserver agreement.

KW - Contrast media

KW - Gallbladder

KW - Polyps

KW - Ultrasonography

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064257818&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00330-019-06123-w

DO - 10.1007/s00330-019-06123-w

M3 - Article

VL - 29

SP - 3772

EP - 3781

JO - European radiology

JF - European radiology

SN - 0938-7994

IS - 7

ER -