Christoph F. Dietrich

WFUMB Guidelines and Recommendations for Clinical Use of Ultrasound Elastography: Part 2: Breast

The World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (WFUMB) has produced these guidelines for the use of elastography techniques in liver disease. For each available technique, the reproducibility, results, and limitations are analyzed, and recommendations are given. Finally, recommendations based on the international literature and the findings of the WFUMB expert group are established as answers to common questions. The document has a clinical perspective and is aimed at assessing the usefulness of elastography in the management of liver diseases.

WFUMB Guidelines and Recommendations for Clinical Use of Ultrasound Elastography: Part 1: Basic Principles and Terminology

Conventional diagnostic ultrasound images of the anatomy (as opposed to blood flow) reveal differences in the acoustic properties of soft tissues (mainly echogenicity but also, to some extent, attenuation), whereas ultrasound-based elasticity images are able to reveal the differences in the elastic properties of soft tissues (e.g., elasticity and viscosity). The benefit of elasticity imaging lies in the fact that many soft tissues can share similar ultrasonic echogenicities but may have different mechanical properties that can be used to clearly visualize normal anatomy and delineate pathologic lesions. Typically, all elasticity measurement and imaging methods introduce a mechanical excitation and monitor the resulting tissue response. Some of the most widely available commercial elasticity imaging methods are quasi-static and use external tissue compression to generate images of the resulting tissue strain (or deformation). In addition, many manufacturers now provide shear wave imaging and measurement methods, which deliver stiffness images based upon the shear wave propagation speed. The goal of this review is to describe the fundamental physics and the associated terminology underlying these technologies. We have included a questions and answers section, an extensive appendix, and a glossary of terms in this manuscript. We have also endeavored to ensure that the terminology and descriptions, although not identical, are broadly compatible across the WFUMB and EFSUMB sets of guidelines on elastography (Bamber et al. 2013; Cosgrove et al. 2013).

EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations on the Clinical Use of Liver Ultrasound Elastography, Update 2017 (Long Version)

We present here the first update of the 2013 EFSUMB (European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology) Guidelines and Recommendations on the clinical use of elastography with a focus on the assessment of diffuse liver disease. The short version provides clinical information about the practical use of elastography equipment and interpretation of results in the assessment of diffuse liver disease and analyzes the main findings based on published studies, stressing the evidence from meta-analyses. The role of elastography in different etiologies of liver disease and in several clinical scenarios is also discussed. All of the recommendations are judged with regard to their evidence-based strength according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence. This updated document is intended to act as a reference and to provide a practical guide for both beginners and advanced clinical users.

Pancreatic multicenter ultrasound study (PAMUS)

AIMnTo describe the typical CEUS pattern of pancreatic lesions and to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in their characterization.nnnMATERIALS AND METHODSnAll US and CEUS examinations of focal pancreatic masses performed in six centers during a period of five years were reviewed. Inclusion criteria were: focal pancreatic mass pathologically proved, visible at ultrasound (US) and studied with CEUS. All lesions were then evaluated for size, aspect and enhancement pattern. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values with 95% CIs were calculated to define diagnostic accuracy of CEUS in respect to pathology. Diagnostic confidence of US and CEUS, discerning between benign and malignant lesions, were represented by using ROC (receiver operating characteristics) curves. Agreement was evaluated by means of k statistics.nnnRESULTSn1439 pancreatic lesions were included. At CEUS the lesions were divided into solid (89%) and cystic (12%) masses and classified into six and eight categories, respectively. Among the solid lesions, adenocarcinomas were characterized with an accuracy of 87.8%. Among the cystic lesions, cystic tumors were diagnosed with an accuracy of 97.1%. ROC curve area increased from 0.637 for US to 0.877 for CEUS (p<0.0001). Inter-observer agreement was slightly higher for solid (k=0.78) than cystic (k=0.62) lesions. In none of the centers side effects were reported.nnnCONCLUSIONnCEUS is accurate in the characterization of pancreatic lesions. CEUS should be considered as a complementary imaging method for pancreatic lesions characterization.

EFSUMB Guidelines on Interventional Ultrasound (INVUS), Part III – Abdominal Treatment Procedures (Short Version)

The third part of the European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (EFSUMB) Guidelines on Interventional Ultrasound assesses the evidence for ultrasound-guided and assisted interventions in abdominal treatment procedures. Recommendations for clinical practice are presented covering indications, contraindications, safety and efficacy of the broad variety of these techniques. In particular, drainage of abscesses and fluid collections, interventional tumor ablation techniques, interventional treatment of symptomatic cysts and echinococcosis, percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography and drainage, percutaneous gastrostomy, urinary bladder drainage, and nephrostomy are addressed (short version; a long version is published online).

Fortuitously discovered liver lesions

The fortuitously discovered liver lesion is a common problem. Consensus might be expected in terms of its work-up, and yet there is none. This stems in part from the fact that there is no preventive campaign involving the early detection of liver tumors other than for patients with known liver cirrhosis and oncological patients. The work-up (detection and differential diagnosis) of liver tumors comprises theoretical considerations, history, physical examination, laboratory tests, standard ultrasound, Doppler ultrasound techniques, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, as well as image-guided biopsy. CEUS techniques have proved to be the most pertinent method; these techniques became part of the clinical routine about 10 years ago in Europe and Asia and are used for a variety of indications in daily clinical practice. CEUS is in many cases the first and also decisive technical intervention for detecting and characterizing liver tumors. This development is reflected in many CEUS guidelines, e.g., in the European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (EFSUMB) guidelines 2004, 2008 and 2012 as well as the recently published World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology-EFSUMB guidelines 2012. This article sets out considerations for making a structured work-up of incidental liver tumors feasible.

WFUMB Guidelines and Recommendations on the Clinical Use of Ultrasound Elastography: Part 4. Thyroid

The World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (WFUMB) has produced guidelines for the use of elastography techniques, including basic science, breast, liver and thyroid elastography. Here we present elastography in prostate diseases. For each available technique, procedure, reproducibility, results and limitations are analyzed and recommendations are given. Finally, recommendations are given based on the level of evidence of the published literature and on the WFUMB expert groups consensus. This document has a clinical perspective and is aimed at assessing the usefulness of elastography in the management of prostate diseases.

EFSUMB Guidelines on Interventional Ultrasound (INVUS), Part II. Diagnostic Ultrasound-Guided Interventional Procedures (Long Version).

This is the second part of the series on interventional ultrasound guidelines of the Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (EFSUMB). It deals with the diagnostic interventional procedure. General points are discussed which are pertinent to all patients, followed by organ-specific imaging that will allow the correct pathway and planning for the interventional procedure. This will allow for the appropriate imaging workup for each individual interventional procedure (Long version).

The EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations for the Clinical Practice of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in Non-Hepatic Applications: Update 2017 (Long Version)

The updated version of the EFSUMB guidelines on the application of non-hepatic contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) deals with the use of microbubble ultrasound contrast outside the liver in the many established and emerging applications.

Differential diagnosis of small solid pancreatic lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIMSnPancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is typically diagnosed at a late stage. Little is known about the incidental finding of early-stage PDAC. The aim of the current study was to determine the etiology of small solid pancreatic lesions (≤15xa0mm) to optimize clinical management.nnnMETHODSnInclusion criterion for the retrospective study analysis was the incidental finding of primarily undetermined small solid pancreatic lesionsxa0≤15xa0mm in 394 asymptomatic patients. Final diagnoses were based on histology or cytology obtained by imaging-guided biopsy (and at least 12-month follow-up) and/or surgery. Contrast-enhanced US or contrast-enhanced EUS was performed in 219 patients.nnnRESULTSnThe final diagnoses of 394 patients were as follows: 146 PDACs, 156 neuroendocrine tumors, 28 metastases into the pancreas from other primary sites, and 64 various other etiologies. Contrast-enhanced US allowed differential diagnosis of PDAC and non-PDAC in 189 of 219 patients (86%).nnnCONCLUSIONSnApproximately 40% of patients with small solid pancreatic lesions had very early stage PDAC. Approximately 60% of small solid pancreatic lesionsxa0≤15xa0mm are not PDAC and, therefore, do not require radical surgery. Without preoperative diagnosis, an unacceptably large proportion of patients would be exposed to radical surgery with significant morbidity and mortality.