Artifacts and Pitfalls in Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of the Liver

Abstract

Ultrasound technology is always connected to possible artefacts. Since introduction of ultrasound technology the knowledge of those artefacts is eminent to avoid misinterpretations. It is important to know that with the introduction of new ultrasound technology the possibility of artefacts are rising. Whereas artefacts initially were limited to B-mode sonography, every technological step (colour Doppler sonography, contrast enhanced sonography) comes with a range of new artefacts. This article is written to explain the technological basics of ultrasound artefacts and provide the reader with examples in daily practice and how to avoid them.

• Literatur

• 1 Dietrich CF, Frey H, Greis C. Grundlagen. In: Dietrich CF, , editor. Ultraschall-Kurs. Deutscher Ärzteverlag; 2012: 7-50
• 2 Bonhof JA, Bonhof B, Loch EG. Sound beam dimensions as the cause of artifacts in B-mode sonography. Ultraschall in Med 1984; 5: 66-69
• 3 Bonhof JA, Bonhof B, Linhart P. Acoustic dispersing lenses cause artifactual discontinuities in B-mode ultrasonograms. J Ultrasound Med 1984; 3: 5-7
• 4 Bonhof JA, Stapff M, Bonhof B et al. Bow artefact in B-image sonography. Computertomographie 1983; 3: 133-137
• 5 Bonhof JA, Kremer H, Bonhof B et al. Significance of sound beam thickness in real time sonography. In vitro and in vivo observations. Computertomographie 1983; 3: 38-41
• 6 Bonhof JA, Linhart P. Quality of sonography in internal medicine. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 1986; 111: 1227-1229
• 7 Dietrich CF, Ignee A, Hocke M et al. Pitfalls and artefacts using contrast enhanced ultrasound. Z Gastroenterol 2011; 49: 350-356
• 8 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: 187-210
• 9 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 in Med 2013; 34: 11-29
• 10 Dietrich CF, Ignee A, Trojan J et al. Improved characterisation of histologically proven liver tumours by contrast enhanced ultrasonography during the portal venous and specific late phase of SHU 508A. Gut 2004; 53: 401-405
• 11 Strobel D, Seitz K, Blank W et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the characterization of focal liver lesions – diagnostic accuracy in clinical practice (DEGUM multicenter trial). Ultraschall in Med 2008; 29: 499-505
• 12 Strobel D, Bernatik T, Blank W et al. Diagnostic accuracy of CEUS in the differential diagnosis of small (</= 20 mm) and subcentimetric (</= 10 mm) focal liver lesions in comparison with histology. Results of the DEGUM multicenter trial. Ultraschall in Med 2011; 32: 593-597
• 13 Seitz K, Greis C, Schuler A et al. Frequency of tumor entities among liver tumors of unclear etiology initially detected by sonography in the noncirrhotic or cirrhotic livers of 1349 patients. Results of the DEGUM multicenter study. Ultraschall in Med 2011; 32: 598-603
• 14 Ignee A, Piscaglia F, Ott M et al. A benign tumour of the liver mimicking malignant liver disease – cholangiocellular adenoma. Scand J Gastroenterol 2009; 44: 633-636
• 15 Dietrich CF, Cui XW, Boozari B et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the diagnostic algorithm of hepatocellular and cholangiocellular carcinoma, comments on the AASLD guidelines. Ultraschall in Med 2012; 33: S57-S66
• 16 Wilson SR, Kim TK, Jang HJ et al. Enhancement patterns of focal liver masses: discordance between contrast-enhanced sonography and contrast-enhanced CT and MRI. Am J Roentgenol Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189: W7-W12
• 17 Piscaglia F, Nolsoe 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 in Med 2012; 33: 33-59
• 18 Dietrich CF, Mertens JC, Braden B et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of histologically proven liver hemangiomas. Hepatology 2007; 45: 1139-1145
• 19 Dietrich CF. Liver tumor characterization – comments and illustrations regarding guidelines. Ultraschall in Med 2012; 33: S22-S30
• 20 Trojan J, Hammerstingl R, Engels K et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the diagnosis of malignant mesenchymal liver tumors. J Clin Ultrasound 2010; 38: 227-231
• 21 Dietrich CF, Averkiou MA, Correas JM et al. An EFSUMB introduction into Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (DCE-US) for quantification of tumour perfusion. Ultraschall in Med 2012; 33: 344-351
• 22 Yu H, Jang HJ, Kim TK et al. Pseudoenhancement within the local ablation zone of hepatic tumors due to a nonlinear artifact on contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Am J Roentgenol Am J Roentgenol 2010; 194: 653-659
• 23 Caruso G, Martegani A, Aiani L et al. Heterogeneous delayed enhancement of hepatic parenchyma after intravenous infusion of sonographic contrast agent: a new hypothesis. Radiol Med 2007; 112: 56-63
• 24 Okada M, Albrecht T, Blomley MJ et al. Heterogeneous delayed enhancement of the liver after ultrasound contrast agent injection – a normal variant. Ultrasound Med Biol 2002; 28: 1089-1092
• 25 Rasmussen H, Dirven HA, Grant D et al. Etiology of cecal and hepatic lesions in mice after administration of gas-carrier contrast agents used in ultrasound imaging. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2003; 188: 176-184
• 26 Cui XW, Ignee A, Hocke M et al. Prolonged Heterogeneous Liver Enhancement on Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound. Ultraschall in Med 2013;