UpToDate
Official reprint from UpToDate®
www.uptodate.com ©2016 UpToDate®

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: Gastrointestinal applications outside of the liver

Author
Christoph F Dietrich, MD, MBA
Section Editor
Jonathan B Kruskal, MD, PhD
Deputy Editor
Anne C Travis, MD, MSc, FACG, AGAF

INTRODUCTION

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is a well-established technique for imaging the liver and other organs [1-6]. It is used in most of Europe and Asia, as well as in many other countries worldwide. However, the contrast agents used for CEUS of the liver have not been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, so its use in the United States is limited to research settings [1,2,7]. CEUS is most often used for imaging the liver, but it has also been used to image other gastrointestinal organs, as well as non-gastrointestinal organs such as the heart, spleen, kidneys, and breast [5]. (See "Contrast echocardiography: Clinical applications" and "Contrast echocardiography: Contrast agents, safety, and imaging technique".)

This topic will review the use of CEUS in the pancreas, hepatobiliary system, and gastrointestinal tract. The use of CEUS for the evaluation of liver lesions is discussed separately. (See "Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the evaluation of liver lesions".)

GENERAL PRINCIPLES

CEUS uses ultrasound contrast agents to improve visualization and characterization of anatomic structures and lesions. Ultrasound contrast agents are 1 to 10 microns in size (equal to or smaller than red blood cells) and permit visualization of both the macrovasculature and the microvasculature. CEUS permits real-time visualization of contrast-enhancement patterns during the arterial and venous phases, and in the case of the liver, the portal-venous phase [8]. The general principles behind CEUS, as well as advantages of CEUS over conventional B-mode ultrasonography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging, are discussed in detail elsewhere. (See "Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the evaluation of liver lesions", section on 'General principles' and "Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the evaluation of liver lesions", section on 'Advantages of CEUS'.)

TECHNICAL ASPECTS

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) can be performed using a traditional transcutaneous approach or in combination with endoscopic ultrasound (typically done for the evaluation of pancreatic lesions). Only small amounts of ultrasound contrast agents are required for CEUS. For non-liver indications, a dose of 2.4 mL is often used.

Transcutaneous contrast-enhanced ultrasound — Prior to performing CEUS, a conventional transcutaneous (B-mode) ultrasound examination is performed. The ultrasound contrast agent is then injected and imaging is obtained from the arterial and venous phases. The arterial phase is marked by the first visualization of the contrast agent (typically 10 to 20 seconds after contrast injection). Enhancement increases progressively through the arterial phase. The venous phase starts approximately 30 to 45 seconds after contrast injection and is marked by plateauing of the enhancement followed by a progressive decrease in enhancement until the microbubbles are no longer seen. Different enhancement patterns can help identify a lesion’s vascular composition, which can assist with lesion identification.

                          

Subscribers log in here

To continue reading this article, you must log in with your personal, hospital, or group practice subscription. For more information or to purchase a personal subscription, click below on the option that best describes you:
Literature review current through: Nov 2016. | This topic last updated: Wed Sep 23 00:00:00 GMT+00:00 2015.
The content on the UpToDate website is not intended nor recommended as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your own physician or other qualified health care professional regarding any medical questions or conditions. The use of this website is governed by the UpToDate Terms of Use ©2016 UpToDate, Inc.
References
Top
  1. Claudon M, Dietrich CF, Choi BI, et al. Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the liver - update 2012: A WFUMB-EFSUMB initiative in cooperation with representatives of AFSUMB, AIUM, ASUM, FLAUS and ICUS. Ultrasound Med Biol 2013; 39:187.
  2. Claudon M, Dietrich CF, Choi BI, et al. Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the liver--update 2012: a WFUMB-EFSUMB initiative in cooperation with representatives of AFSUMB, AIUM, ASUM, FLAUS and ICUS. Ultraschall Med 2013; 34:11.
  3. Albrecht T, Blomley M, Bolondi L, et al. Guidelines for the use of contrast agents in ultrasound. January 2004. Ultraschall Med 2004; 25:249.
  4. Claudon M, Cosgrove D, Albrecht T, et al. Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) - update 2008. Ultraschall Med 2008; 29:28.
  5. Piscaglia F, Nolsøe C, Dietrich CF, et al. The EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations on the Clinical Practice of Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS): update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. Ultraschall Med 2012; 33:33.
  6. Dietrich CF, Averkiou MA, Correas JM, et al. An EFSUMB introduction into Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (DCE-US) for quantification of tumour perfusion. Ultraschall Med 2012; 33:344.
  7. Wilson SR, Greenbaum LD, Goldberg BB. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: what is the evidence and what are the obstacles? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 193:55.
  8. Jang JY, Kim MY, Jeong SW, et al. Current consensus and guidelines of contrast enhanced ultrasound for the characterization of focal liver lesions. Clin Mol Hepatol 2013; 19:1.
  9. Becker D, Strobel D, Bernatik T, Hahn EG. Echo-enhanced color- and power-Doppler EUS for the discrimination between focal pancreatitis and pancreatic carcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc 2001; 53:784.
  10. Bhutani MS, Hoffman BJ, van Velse A, Hawes RH. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasonography with galactose microparticles: SHU508 A (Levovist). Endoscopy 1997; 29:635.
  11. Hocke M, Schulze E, Gottschalk P, et al. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound in discrimination between focal pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer. World J Gastroenterol 2006; 12:246.
  12. Beyer-Enke SA, Hocke M, Ignee A, et al. Contrast enhanced transabdominal ultrasound in the characterisation of pancreatic lesions with cystic appearance. JOP 2010; 11:427.
  13. Dietrich CF. Contrast-enhanced low mechanical index endoscopic ultrasound (CELMI-EUS). Endoscopy 2009; 41 Suppl 2:E43.
  14. Dietrich CF, Cui XW, Schreiber-Dietrich DG, Ignee A. EFSUMB guidelines 2011: comments and illustrations. Ultraschall Med 2012; 33 Suppl 1:S11.
  15. D'Onofrio M, Malagò R, Zamboni G, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography better identifies pancreatic tumor vascularization than helical CT. Pancreatology 2005; 5:398.
  16. D'Onofrio M, Megibow AJ, Faccioli N, et al. Comparison of contrast-enhanced sonography and MRI in displaying anatomic features of cystic pancreatic masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189:1435.
  17. Faccioli N, D'Onofrio M, Malagò R, et al. Resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: depiction of tumoral margins at contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. Pancreas 2008; 37:265.
  18. Numata K, Ozawa Y, Kobayashi N, et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography of pancreatic carcinoma: correlations with pathological findings. J Gastroenterol 2005; 40:631.
  19. Dietrich CF, Braden B, Hocke M, et al. Improved characterisation of solitary solid pancreatic tumours using contrast enhanced transabdominal ultrasound. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2008; 134:635.
  20. D'Onofrio M, Barbi E, Dietrich CF, et al. Pancreatic multicenter ultrasound study (PAMUS). Eur J Radiol 2012; 81:630.
  21. Dietrich CF, Ignee A, Braden B, et al. Improved differentiation of pancreatic tumors using contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008; 6:590.
  22. Dietrich CF, Schreiber-Dietrich D, Hocke M. [Comments on the EFSUMB non-liver Guidelines 2011]. Praxis (Bern 1994) 2012; 101:1175.
  23. Mäkinen K, Loimas S, Nuutinen P, et al. The growth pattern and microvasculature of pancreatic tumours induced with cultured carcinoma cells. Br J Cancer 2000; 82:900.
  24. Ryschich E, Schmidt E, Maksan SM, et al. Expansion of endothelial surface by an increase of vessel diameter during tumor angiogenesis in experimental and hepatocellular and pancreatic cancer. World J Gastroenterol 2004; 10:3171.
  25. Schmidt J, Ryschich E, Daniel V, et al. Vascular structure and microcirculation of experimental pancreatic carcinoma in rats. Eur J Surg 2000; 166:328.
  26. D'Onofrio M, Zamboni G, Tognolini A, et al. Mass-forming pancreatitis: value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. World J Gastroenterol 2006; 12:4181.
  27. Kersting S, Konopke R, Kersting F, et al. Quantitative perfusion analysis of transabdominal contrast-enhanced ultrasonography of pancreatic masses and carcinomas. Gastroenterology 2009; 137:1903.
  28. Ryschich E, Schmidt J, Loeffler T, et al. Different radiogenic effects on microcirculation in healthy pancreas and in pancreatic carcinoma of the rat. Ann Surg 2003; 237:515.
  29. D'Onofrio M, Mansueto G, Falconi M, Procacci C. Neuroendocrine pancreatic tumor: value of contrast enhanced ultrasonography. Abdom Imaging 2004; 29:246.
  30. Malagò R, D'Onofrio M, Zamboni GA, et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography of nonfunctioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 192:424.
  31. Mörk H, Ignee A, Schuessler G, et al. Analysis of neuroendocrine tumour metastases in the liver using contrast enhanced ultrasonography. Scand J Gastroenterol 2007; 42:652.
  32. Hocke M, Cui XW, Domagk D, et al. Pancreatic cystic lesions: The value of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound to influence the clinical pathway. Endosc Ultrasound 2014; 3:123.
  33. Ros PR, Mortelé KJ. Imaging features of pancreatic neoplasms. JBR-BTR 2001; 84:239.
  34. Tang SS, Huang LP, Wang Y, Ma Y. Solid pseudopapillary tumors of the pancreas: contrast-enhanced sonographic features. J Ultrasound Med 2012; 31:257.
  35. Cantisani V, Mortele KJ, Levy A, et al. MR imaging features of solid pseudopapillary tumor of the pancreas in adult and pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181:395.
  36. Faccioli N, Crippa S, Bassi C, D'Onofrio M. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography of the pancreas. Pancreatology 2009; 9:560.
  37. Seicean A, Badea R, Stan-Iuga R, et al. The added value of real-time harmonics contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasonography for the characterisation of pancreatic diseases in routine practice. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2010; 19:99.
  38. Sakamoto H, Kitano M, Kamata K, et al. Diagnosis of pancreatic tumors by endoscopic ultrasonography. World J Radiol 2010; 2:122.
  39. Ohno E, Itoh A, Kawashima H, et al. Malignant transformation of branch duct-type intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas based on contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasonography morphological changes: focus on malignant transformation of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm itself. Pancreas 2012; 41:855.
  40. Rickes S, Rauh P, Uhle C, et al. Contrast-enhanced sonography in pancreatic diseases. Eur J Radiol 2007; 64:183.
  41. Ripollés T, Martínez MJ, López E, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the staging of acute pancreatitis. Eur Radiol 2010; 20:2518.
  42. Crosara S, D'Onofrio M, De Robertis R, et al. Autoimmune pancreatitis: Multimodality non-invasive imaging diagnosis. World J Gastroenterol 2014; 20:16881.
  43. Mauch M, Blank W, Kunze G, et al. Importance of Abdominal Ultrasound in 17 Patients with Histologically Confirmed Autoimmune Pancreatitis (AIP). Ultraschall Med 2015; 36:248.
  44. Hocke M, Ignee A, Dietrich CF. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis. Endoscopy 2011; 43:163.
  45. Cui XW, Ignee A, Braden B, et al. Biliary papillomatosis and new ultrasound imaging modalities. Z Gastroenterol 2012; 50:226.
  46. Dietrich CF, Maddalena ME, Cui XW, et al. Liver tumor characterization--review of the literature. Ultraschall Med 2012; 33 Suppl 1:S3.
  47. Dietrich CF. Liver tumor characterization--comments and illustrations regarding guidelines. Ultraschall Med 2012; 33 Suppl 1:S22.
  48. Barreiros AP, Piscaglia F, Dietrich CF. Contrast enhanced ultrasound for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): comments on AASLD guidelines. J Hepatol 2012; 57:930.
  49. Ødegaard S, Nesje LB, Lærum OD, Kimmey MB. High-frequency ultrasonographic imaging of the gastrointestinal wall. Expert Rev Med Devices 2012; 9:263.
  50. Plikat K, Klebl F, Buchner C, et al. [Evaluation of intestinal hyperaemia in inflamed bowel by high resolution Contrast Harmonic Imaging (CHI)]. Ultraschall Med 2004; 25:257.
  51. Dietrich CF. Significance of abdominal ultrasound in inflammatory bowel disease. Dig Dis 2009; 27:482.
  52. Dietrich CF, Jedrzejczyk M, Ignee A. Sonographic assessment of splanchnic arteries and the bowel wall. Eur J Radiol 2007; 64:202.
  53. Wilson SR, Burns PN. Microbubble-enhanced US in body imaging: what role? Radiology 2010; 257:24.
  54. Levine A, Koletzko S, Turner D, et al. ESPGHAN revised porto criteria for the diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease in children and adolescents. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2014; 58:795.
  55. Pallotta N, Tomei E, Viscido A, et al. Small intestine contrast ultrasonography: an alternative to radiology in the assessment of small bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2005; 11:146.
  56. Migaleddu V, Quaia E, Scanu D, et al. Inflammatory activity in Crohn's disease: CE-US. Abdom Imaging 2011; 36:142.
  57. Serra C, Menozzi G, Labate AM, et al. Ultrasound assessment of vascularization of the thickened terminal ileum wall in Crohn's disease patients using a low-mechanical index real-time scanning technique with a second generation ultrasound contrast agent. Eur J Radiol 2007; 62:114.
  58. Migaleddu V, Scanu AM, Quaia E, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonographic evaluation of inflammatory activity in Crohn's disease. Gastroenterology 2009; 137:43.
  59. Girlich C, Schacherer D, Jung EM, et al. Comparison between a clinical activity index (Harvey-Bradshaw-Index), laboratory inflammation markers and quantitative assessment of bowel wall vascularization by contrast-enhanced ultrasound in Crohn's disease. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81:1105.
  60. Schreyer AG, Finkenzeller T, Gössmann H, et al. Microcirculation and perfusion with contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in Crohn's disease: first results with linear contrast harmonic imaging (CHI). Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 2008; 40:143.
  61. Pauls S, Gabelmann A, Schmidt SA, et al. Evaluating bowel wall vascularity in Crohn's disease: a comparison of dynamic MRI and wideband harmonic imaging contrast-enhanced low MI ultrasound. Eur Radiol 2006; 16:2410.
  62. Horjus Talabur Horje CS, Bruijnen R, Roovers L, et al. Contrast Enhanced Abdominal Ultrasound in the Assessment of Ileal Inflammation in Crohn's Disease: A Comparison with MR Enterography. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0136105.
  63. Guidi L, De Franco A, De Vitis I, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography with SonoVue after infliximab therapy in Crohn's disease. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2006; 10:23.
  64. Dietrich CF, Jenssen C, Hocke M, et al. Imaging of gastrointestinal stromal tumours with modern ultrasound techniques - a pictorial essay. Z Gastroenterol 2012; 50:457.
  65. Sakamoto H, Kitano M, Matsui S, et al. Estimation of malignant potential of GI stromal tumors by contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73:227.
  66. Dietrich CF, Jenssen C. [Evidence based endoscopic ultrasound]. Z Gastroenterol 2011; 49:599.
  67. Duran C, Valera A, Alguersuari A, et al. Voiding urosonography: the study of the urethra is no longer a limitation of the technique. Pediatr Radiol 2009; 39:124.
  68. Darge K. Voiding urosonography with ultrasound contrast agents for the diagnosis of vesicoureteric reflux in children. I. Procedure. Pediatr Radiol 2008; 38:40.
  69. Darge K. Voiding urosonography with US contrast agents for the diagnosis of vesicoureteric reflux in children. II. Comparison with radiological examinations. Pediatr Radiol 2008; 38:54.
  70. Ignee A, Jenssen C, Cui XW, et al. Intracavitary contrast-enhanced ultrasound in abscess drainage--feasibility and clinical value. Scand J Gastroenterol 2016; 51:41.
  71. Cui XW, Ignee A, Baum U, Dietrich CF. Feasibility and usefulness of using swallow contrast-enhanced ultrasound to diagnose Zenker's diverticulum: preliminary results. Ultrasound Med Biol 2015; 41:975.
  72. Henrich W, Meckies J, Friedmann W. Demonstration of a recto-vaginal fistula with the ultrasound contrast medium Echovist. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000; 15:148.
  73. Volkmer BG, Nesslauer T, Küfer R, et al. [Diagnosis of vesico-intestinal fistulas by contrast medium enhanced 3-D ultrasound]. Ultraschall Med 2001; 22:81.
  74. Chew SS, Yang JL, Newstead GL, Douglas PR. Anal fistula: Levovist-enhanced endoanal ultrasound: a pilot study. Dis Colon Rectum 2003; 46:377.
  75. Ignee A, Cui XW, Schreiber-Dietrich D, Dietrich CF. The use of ultrasound contrast agent in ultrasound guided puncture and drainage of abscess. Z Gastroenterol 2014; 52:265.
  76. Nuernberg D, Braden B, Ignee A, et al. [Functional ultrasound in gastroenterology]. Z Gastroenterol 2008; 46:883.
  77. Dietrich CF, Cui XW, Barreiros AP, et al. EFSUMB guidelines 2011: comment on emergent indications and visions. Ultraschall Med 2012; 33 Suppl 1:S39.
  78. Ignee A, Schuessler G, Dietrich CF. Extravaskuläre Applikation von Ultraschallkontrastmitteln. In: Interventionelle Sonographie, Dietrich CF, Nürnberg D (Eds), Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart, New York 2011. p.514.
  79. Ignee A, Baum U, Schuessler G, Dietrich CF. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound-guided percutaneous cholangiography and cholangiodrainage (CEUS-PTCD). Endoscopy 2009; 41:725.
  80. Dietrich CF, Ignee A, Greis C, et al. Artifacts and pitfalls in contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the liver. Ultraschall Med 2014; 35:108.