E. Busko, K. Kozubova, S. Bagnenko, A. Karachun, Ilya A. Burovick, A. Goncharova, E. Kostromina, R. Kadyrleev, Indira H. Kurganskaya, L. Shevkunov
{"title":"Comparative assessment of diagnostic value of computed tomography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound in colorectal cancer liver metastases diagnosis","authors":"E. Busko, K. Kozubova, S. Bagnenko, A. Karachun, Ilya A. Burovick, A. Goncharova, E. Kostromina, R. Kadyrleev, Indira H. Kurganskaya, L. Shevkunov","doi":"10.16931/1995-5464.2022-1-22-32","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: This study aimed to clarify the ultrasound semiotics of colorectal cancer liver metastases contrast enhancement, and perform a comparative assessment of the diagnostic efficacy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and computed tomography (CT).Methods: We studied 40 patients with colorectal cancer: patients receiving treatment for the disease and having newly diagnosed colorectal cancer. All patients underwent contrast-enhanced ultrasound and CT. In the cases of suspected malignancy, a trephine biopsy and a morphological examination were performed.Results: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and CT demonstrated comparable and high diagnostic efficacy. The sensitivity of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound in malignancy detection was 93.3%, with 90% specificity, 96.55% positive predictive value, 81.82% negative predictive value, and 92.5% accuracy. The sensitivity of contrast-enhanced CT was 93.3%, with 80% specificity, 93.33% positive predictive value, 80% negative predictive value, and 92.5% accuracy.Conclusions: For patients with colorectal cancer with contraindications to contrast-enhanced CT, contrast-enhanced ultrasound may be used an alternative imaging option for the differential diagnosis of liver neoplasms.","PeriodicalId":36549,"journal":{"name":"Annals of HPB Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of HPB Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16931/1995-5464.2022-1-22-32","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to clarify the ultrasound semiotics of colorectal cancer liver metastases contrast enhancement, and perform a comparative assessment of the diagnostic efficacy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and computed tomography (CT).Methods: We studied 40 patients with colorectal cancer: patients receiving treatment for the disease and having newly diagnosed colorectal cancer. All patients underwent contrast-enhanced ultrasound and CT. In the cases of suspected malignancy, a trephine biopsy and a morphological examination were performed.Results: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and CT demonstrated comparable and high diagnostic efficacy. The sensitivity of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound in malignancy detection was 93.3%, with 90% specificity, 96.55% positive predictive value, 81.82% negative predictive value, and 92.5% accuracy. The sensitivity of contrast-enhanced CT was 93.3%, with 80% specificity, 93.33% positive predictive value, 80% negative predictive value, and 92.5% accuracy.Conclusions: For patients with colorectal cancer with contraindications to contrast-enhanced CT, contrast-enhanced ultrasound may be used an alternative imaging option for the differential diagnosis of liver neoplasms.