Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Abdominal Radiology 4/2018

01-04-2018

Artifacts in contrast-enhanced ultrasound: a pictorial essay

Authors: David T. Fetzer, Vasileios Rafailidis, Cynthia Peterson, Edward G. Grant, Paul Sidhu, Richard G. Barr

Published in: Abdominal Radiology | Issue 4/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Although contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has become a widely utilized and accepted modality in much of the world, the associated contrast agents have only recently received approval in the United States. As with all radiological techniques, image artifacts are encountered in CEUS, some of which relate to commonly encountered ultrasound artifacts, while others are unique to this technique. Image artifacts must be recognized when performing and interpreting examinations to improve technique and diagnostic accuracy. In this article, we review artifacts that may be encountered in CEUS, and where possible discuss how to minimize them or mitigate their effect on image quality and interpretation.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Dietrich CF, et al. (2014) Artifacts and pitfalls in contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the liver. Ultraschall Med 35(2):108–125; quiz 126–127. Dietrich CF, et al. (2014) Artifacts and pitfalls in contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the liver. Ultraschall Med 35(2):108–125; quiz 126–127.
2.
go back to reference Dietrich CF, et al. (2011) Pitfalls and artefacts using contrast enhanced ultrasound. Z Gastroenterol 49(3):350–356CrossRefPubMed Dietrich CF, et al. (2011) Pitfalls and artefacts using contrast enhanced ultrasound. Z Gastroenterol 49(3):350–356CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Forsberg F, et al. (1994) Artifacts in ultrasonic contrast agent studies. J Ultrasound Med 13(5):357–365CrossRefPubMed Forsberg F, et al. (1994) Artifacts in ultrasonic contrast agent studies. J Ultrasound Med 13(5):357–365CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Denham SL, Alexander LF, Robbin ML (2016) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: practical review for the assessment of hepatic and renal lesions. Ultrasound Q 32(2):116–125CrossRefPubMed Denham SL, Alexander LF, Robbin ML (2016) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: practical review for the assessment of hepatic and renal lesions. Ultrasound Q 32(2):116–125CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Girard MS, et al. (1999) Assessment of liver and kidney enhancement with a perfluorocarbon vapor-stabilized US contrast agent. Acad Radiol 6(5):273–281CrossRefPubMed Girard MS, et al. (1999) Assessment of liver and kidney enhancement with a perfluorocarbon vapor-stabilized US contrast agent. Acad Radiol 6(5):273–281CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Sirlin CB, et al. (1999) Effect of acquisition rate on liver and portal vein enhancement with microbubble contrast. Ultrasound Med Biol 25(3):331–338CrossRefPubMed Sirlin CB, et al. (1999) Effect of acquisition rate on liver and portal vein enhancement with microbubble contrast. Ultrasound Med Biol 25(3):331–338CrossRefPubMed
7.
8.
go back to reference Klibanov AL, et al. (2004) Detection of individual microbubbles of ultrasound contrast agents: imaging of free-floating and targeted bubbles. Invest Radiol 39(3):187–195CrossRefPubMed Klibanov AL, et al. (2004) Detection of individual microbubbles of ultrasound contrast agents: imaging of free-floating and targeted bubbles. Invest Radiol 39(3):187–195CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference ten Kate GL, et al. (2012) Far-wall pseudoenhancement during contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the carotid arteries: clinical description and in vitro reproduction. Ultrasound Med Biol 38(4):593–600CrossRefPubMed ten Kate GL, et al. (2012) Far-wall pseudoenhancement during contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the carotid arteries: clinical description and in vitro reproduction. Ultrasound Med Biol 38(4):593–600CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Ten Kate GL, et al. (2013) Current status and future developments of contrast-enhanced ultrasound of carotid atherosclerosis. J Vasc Surg 57(2):539–546CrossRefPubMed Ten Kate GL, et al. (2013) Current status and future developments of contrast-enhanced ultrasound of carotid atherosclerosis. J Vasc Surg 57(2):539–546CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Jo PC, et al. (2017) Integration of contrast-enhanced US into a multimodality approach to imaging of nodules in a cirrhotic liver: how i do it. Radiology 282(2):317–331CrossRefPubMed Jo PC, et al. (2017) Integration of contrast-enhanced US into a multimodality approach to imaging of nodules in a cirrhotic liver: how i do it. Radiology 282(2):317–331CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Harvey CJ, et al. (2000) Hepatic malignancies: improved detection with pulse-inversion US in late phase of enhancement with SH U 508A-early experience. Radiology 216(3):903–908CrossRefPubMed Harvey CJ, et al. (2000) Hepatic malignancies: improved detection with pulse-inversion US in late phase of enhancement with SH U 508A-early experience. Radiology 216(3):903–908CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Quaia E (2005) In: Quaia E, (ed) Artefacts from microbubble-based agents, in contrast media in ultrasonography basic principles and clinical applications. New York: Springer, pp. 25–29 Quaia E (2005) In: Quaia E, (ed) Artefacts from microbubble-based agents, in contrast media in ultrasonography basic principles and clinical applications. New York: Springer, pp. 25–29
14.
go back to reference Dietrich CF, et al. (2007) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of histologically proven liver hemangiomas. Hepatology 45(5):1139–1145CrossRefPubMed Dietrich CF, et al. (2007) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of histologically proven liver hemangiomas. Hepatology 45(5):1139–1145CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Dietrich CF, et al. (2012) Liver tumor characterization–review of the literature. Ultraschall Med 33(Suppl 1):S3–S10PubMed Dietrich CF, et al. (2012) Liver tumor characterization–review of the literature. Ultraschall Med 33(Suppl 1):S3–S10PubMed
16.
go back to reference Malhi H, Grant EG, Duddalwar V (2014) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the liver and kidney. Radiol Clin North Am 52(6):1177–1190CrossRefPubMed Malhi H, Grant EG, Duddalwar V (2014) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the liver and kidney. Radiol Clin North Am 52(6):1177–1190CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Gutberlet M, et al. (1997) Contrast agent enhanced duplex ultrasonography: visualization of the hepatic artery after orthotopic liver transplantation. Rofo 166(5):411–416CrossRefPubMed Gutberlet M, et al. (1997) Contrast agent enhanced duplex ultrasonography: visualization of the hepatic artery after orthotopic liver transplantation. Rofo 166(5):411–416CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Gutberlet M, et al. (1998) Do ultrasonic contrast agents artificially increase maximum Doppler shift? In vivo study of human common carotid arteries. J Ultrasound Med 17(2):97–102CrossRefPubMed Gutberlet M, et al. (1998) Do ultrasonic contrast agents artificially increase maximum Doppler shift? In vivo study of human common carotid arteries. J Ultrasound Med 17(2):97–102CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Terslev L, et al. (2005) Doppler ultrasound findings in healthy wrists and finger joints before and after use of two different contrast agents. Ann Rheum Dis 64(6):824–827CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Terslev L, et al. (2005) Doppler ultrasound findings in healthy wrists and finger joints before and after use of two different contrast agents. Ann Rheum Dis 64(6):824–827CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Kono Y, et al. (2004) Carotid arteries: contrast-enhanced US angiography–preliminary clinical experience. Radiology 230(2):561–568CrossRefPubMed Kono Y, et al. (2004) Carotid arteries: contrast-enhanced US angiography–preliminary clinical experience. Radiology 230(2):561–568CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Hindi APC, Barr RG (2013) Artifacts in diagnostic ultrasound. Reports in Medical. Imaging 6:29–48 Hindi APC, Barr RG (2013) Artifacts in diagnostic ultrasound. Reports in Medical. Imaging 6:29–48
Metadata
Title
Artifacts in contrast-enhanced ultrasound: a pictorial essay
Authors
David T. Fetzer
Vasileios Rafailidis
Cynthia Peterson
Edward G. Grant
Paul Sidhu
Richard G. Barr
Publication date
01-04-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Abdominal Radiology / Issue 4/2018
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Electronic ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-017-1417-8

Other articles of this Issue 4/2018

Abdominal Radiology 4/2018 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.