» Articles » PMID: 38720010

Comparing Sonazoid Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound to Contrast-enhanced CT and MRI for Differentially Diagnosing Renal Lesions: a Prospective Multicenter Study

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced (CE) ultrasound using Sonazoid (SNZ-CEUS) by comparing with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) for differentiating benign and malignant renal masses.

Materials And Methods: 306 consecutive patients (from 7 centers) with renal masses (40 benign tumors, 266 malignant tumors) diagnosed by both SNZ-CEUS, CE-CT or CE-MRI were enrolled between September 2020 and February 2021. The examinations were performed within 7 days, but the sequence was not fixed. Histologic results were available for 301 of 306 (98.37%) lesions and 5 lesions were considered benign after at least 2 year follow-up without change in size and image characteristics. The diagnostic performances were evaluated by sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and compared by McNemar's test.

Results: In the head-to-head comparison, SNZ-CEUS and CE-MRI had comparable sensitivity (95.60 vs. 94.51%, P = 0.997), specificity (65.22 vs. 73.91%, P = 0.752), positive predictive value (91.58 vs. 93.48%) and negative predictive value (78.95 vs. 77.27%); SNZ-CEUS and CE-CT showed similar sensitivity (97.31 vs. 96.24%, P = 0.724); however, SNZ-CEUS had relatively lower than specificity than CE-CT (59.09 vs. 68.18%, P = 0.683). For nodules > 4 cm, CE-MRI demonstrated higher specificity than SNZ-CEUS (90.91 vs. 72.73%, P = 0.617) without compromise the sensitivity.

Conclusions: SNZ-CEUS, CE-CT, and CE-MRI demonstrate desirable and comparable sensitivity for the differentiation of renal mass. However, the specificity of all three imaging modalities is not satisfactory. SNZ-CEUS may be a suitable alternative modality for patients with renal dysfunction and those allergic to gadolinium or iodine-based agents.

Citing Articles

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of collecting duct carcinoma in the renal: a case report misdiagnosed as renal abscess on computed tomography scan.

Luo Y, Zhang J, Wu M, Huang Q, Liu F, Qiao L Front Oncol. 2025; 14():1511009.

PMID: 39850820 PMC: 11754233. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1511009.


Clinical application of radiomics for the prediction of treatment outcome and survival in patients with renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review.

Khene Z, Tachibana I, Bertail T, Fleury R, Bhanvadia R, Kapur P World J Urol. 2024; 42(1):541.

PMID: 39325194 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-05247-z.

References
1.
Siegel R, Miller K, Fuchs H, Jemal A . Cancer Statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021; 71(1):7-33. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21654. View

2.
Ferlay J, Colombet M, Soerjomataram I, Dyba T, Randi G, Bettio M . Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: Estimates for 40 countries and 25 major cancers in 2018. Eur J Cancer. 2018; 103:356-387. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2018.07.005. View

3.
Ljungberg B, Bensalah K, Canfield S, Dabestani S, Hofmann F, Hora M . EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: 2014 update. Eur Urol. 2015; 67(5):913-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.005. View

4.
Song X, Tian Y, Li H, Liu B, Zhang A, Hong Y . Research progress on advanced renal cell carcinoma. J Int Med Res. 2020; 48(6):300060520924265. PMC: 7294379. DOI: 10.1177/0300060520924265. View

5.
Barr R, Peterson C, Hindi A . Evaluation of indeterminate renal masses with contrast-enhanced US: a diagnostic performance study. Radiology. 2014; 271(1):133-42. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13130161. View