Utilidad de la ecografía con contraste en la práctica clínica diaria. Estudio multicéntrico español CEUS / Usefulness of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in daily clinical practice: A multicenter study in Spain

Objetivos: El objetivo de este estudio multicéntrico ha sido evaluar si la ecografía con contraste permite aumentar el rendimiento diagnóstico de la ecografía basal. Material y métodos: En este estudio prospectivo multicéntrico realizado en 42 hospitales se incluyeron 1.786 pacientes con estudios ecográficos considerados como no concluyentes. El 84,9% fueron ecografías abdominales (incluyendo estudios hepáticos, renales, esplénicos y de otras localizaciones), el 6,2% fueron estudios vasculares periféricos, el 4,3% fueron estudios mamarios y el 4,6% fueron estudios de otras localizaciones. Se evaluó el tipo de ecografía con contraste (Doppler color o método específico de contraste), el tipo de contraste, la dosis y el número de dosis y el tipo de administración (en forma de bolo o infusión). Sobre los hallazgos obtenidos en la ecografía con contraste se valoró si conseguía aumentar el rendimiento diagnóstico de la ecografía basal y si permitía un diagnóstico concluyente. Resultados: El 99,9% de los estudios se realizó con SonoVue, con una dosis de contraste (84,8%) y en forma de bolo (98,5%). En el 91,6% de los casos la ecografía con contraste aumentó el rendimiento diagnóstico de la ecografía basal, y en el 69,2% permitió un diagnóstico de certeza. El mayor rendimiento diagnóstico se obtuvo en los estudios de troncos supraaórticos con un diagnóstico definitivo en el 95,4% de los casos, seguido por el área abdominal con resultado concluyente en el 72,6% de los casos. Conclusiones: El uso de la ecografía con contraste aumentó significativamente el rendimiento diagnóstico de la ecografía basal, y se obtuvo un resultado concluyente en la mayoría de los casos (AU)

Objectives: We aimed to determine whether the use of ultrasonographic contrast agents improves the diagnostic performance of ultrasonography (US).Material and methods: We carried out a prospective multicenter study in 42 hospitals. We included 1786 patients with inconclusive US; 84.9% of the inconclusive studies were abdominal US (including studies of the liver, kidneys, spleen, and other sites), 6.2% were studies of the peripheral vessels, 4.3% were breast studies, and 4.6% were other studies. We evaluated the type of contrast-enhanced US (color Doppler or contrast-specific method), type of contrast agent, dose and number of doses, and type of administration (bolus or infusion). We evaluated whether the findings at contrast-enhanced US improved the diagnostic performance of unenhanced US and whether they enabled a conclusive diagnosis to be reached. Results: The contrast agent SonoVue was used in 99.9% of the studies; a single dose of contrast agent was used in 84.8%, and the contrast agent was administered in bolus in 98.5%. Contrast-enhanced US improved the diagnostic performance in 91.6% of cases and enabled the conclusive diagnosis in 69.2%. The best diagnostic performance was obtained in the supraaortic trunks, where a definitive diagnosis was reached in 95.4% of cases, followed by the abdominal area, with a conclusive diagnosis in 72.6% of cases. Conclusions: The use of contrast-enhanced US significantly improved the diagnostic performance of US and enabled a conclusive diagnosis in most cases (AU)

[Usefulness of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in daily clinical practice: a multicenter study in Spain]. / Utilidad de la ecografía con contraste en la práctica clínica diaria. Estudio multicéntrico español CEUS.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine whether the use of ultrasonographic contrast agents improves the diagnostic performance of ultrasonography (US). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We carried out a prospective multicenter study in 42 hospitals. We included 1786 patients with inconclusive US; 84.9% of the inconclusive studies were abdominal US (including studies of the liver, kidneys, spleen, and other sites), 6.2% were studies of the peripheral vessels, 4.3% were breast studies, and 4.6% were other studies. We evaluated the type of contrast-enhanced US (color Doppler or contrast-specific method), type of contrast agent, dose and number of doses, and type of administration (bolus or infusion). We evaluated whether the findings at contrast-enhanced US improved the diagnostic performance of unenhanced US and whether they enabled a conclusive diagnosis to be reached. RESULTS: The contrast agent SonoVue was used in 99.9% of the studies; a single dose of contrast agent was used in 84.8%, and the contrast agent was administered in bolus in 98.5%. Contrast-enhanced US improved the diagnostic performance in 91.6% of cases and enabled the conclusive diagnosis in 69.2%. The best diagnostic performance was obtained in the supraaortic trunks, where a definitive diagnosis was reached in 95.4% of cases, followed by the abdominal area, with a conclusive diagnosis in 72.6% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: The use of contrast-enhanced US significantly improved the diagnostic performance of US and enabled a conclusive diagnosis in most cases.

Hepatic angiosarcoma. Presentation of two cases.

Hepatic angiosarcoma is a rare primary tumor of the liver with a mesenchymal origin. Diagnosis is difficult because clinical manifestations and imaging studies are inconclusive. In many cases a diagnosis is obtained during necropsy, not being apparent during the course of disease. It is associated with several risk factors, but these contribute to explaining only a few of all reported cases. When clinical manifestations begin progression is often fast, and possibilities for curative treatment are limited.We report two cases of hepatic angiosarcoma. In the first one, our patient had an insidious initial course, and then suddenly presented with hepatic failure followed by acute respiratory distress. A diagnosis was reached during necropsy. In the second case, we initiated the study of a chronic liver disease using fine-needle aspiration biopsy, which showed findings suggestive of hepatic angiosarcoma. In the following weeks the patient started on a torpid clinic course, and died from multiple organ failure.

Angiosarcoma hepático. Presentación de dos casos / Hepatic angiosarcoma: Presentation of two cases

El angiosarcoma hepático es una neoplasia de estirpe mesenquimal de baja frecuencia y difícil diagnóstico por su forma inespecífica de manifestarse clínica y radiológicamente. Tanto es así que muchos diagnósticos se obtienen mediante necropsia, no siendo posible poner de manifiesto la enfermedad durante su curso. Se asocia a diferentes agentes etiológicos, pero en la mayoría de los casos no es posible establecer una exposición concreta a ninguno de ellos. Cuando comienza a manifestarse, la evolución suele ser rápida y las opciones de tratamiento curativo son escasas. Presentamos en nuestro trabajo dos casos de angiosarcoma hepático. En el primero, el paciente sufre en principio una evolución insidiosa, presentando al fin, y de forma abrupta, un cuadro de insuficiencia hepática seguido de distrés respiratorio, falleciendo por este motivo. El diagnóstico se alcanza en la necropsia. En el segundo caso se inicia un estudio de hepatopatía en el cual se indica una PAAF. Esta es informada como hallazgos compatibles con angiosarcoma hepático. El paciente presenta en las semanas ulteriores una evolución tórpida, falleciendo en fracaso multiorgánico(AU)

Hepatic angiosarcoma is a rare primary tumor of the liver with a mesenchymal origin. Diagnosis is difficult because clinical manifestations and imaging studies are inconclusive. In many cases a diagnosis is obtained during necropsy, not being apparent during the course of disease. It is associated with several risk factors, but these contribute to explaining only a few of all reported cases. When clinical manifestations begin progression is often fast, and possibilities for curative treatment are limited. We report two cases of hepatic angiosarcoma. In the first one, our patient had an insidious initial course, and then suddenly presented with hepatic failure followed by acute respiratory distress. A diagnosis was reached during necropsy. In the second case, we initiated the study of a chronic liver disease using fine-needle aspiration biopsy, which showed findings suggestive of hepatic angiosarcoma. In the following weeks the patient started on a torpid clinic course, and died from multiple organ failure(AU)

Cytopathology of undifferentiated (embryonal) sarcoma of the liver.

We have studied one undifferentiated (embryonal) sarcoma of the liver (USL) by fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) and have correlated the cytologic findings with those seen in the histologic sections. The main cytologic and immunocytochemical features were: cellular aspirates, mesenchymal clusters, disparity in individual cell size (small round cells, and multinucleated giant cells, sometimes bizarre), absence of biliary pigment, AFP-negative and vimentin-negative tumor cells, AFP-negative and PAS-positive hyaline globules, and apoptotic cells. Only immunostaining for alpha-1-antitrypsin, alpha-1-antichymotrypsin, and carcinoembryonic antigen were positive in tumor cells in histologic sections. The differential diagnosis should be carried out with rhabdomyosarcomas, hepatoblastomas, malignant fibrous histiocytomas, and poorly differentiated hepatocarcinomas. We think that the cytologic features observed in this case, evaluated both in the appropriate clinical context and in the light of the laboratory findings, may permit the correct diagnosis of this infrequent liver tumor. Nevertheless, more cases need to be studied to assess the reliability of our findings.