Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
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.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Insights into Imaging
Published in: Insights into Imaging 4/2015

Open Access 01-08-2015 | Original Article

Activity-based cost analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) related to the diagnostic impact in focal liver lesion characterisation

Authors: Arianna Lorusso, Emilio Quaia, Gabriele Poillucci, Fulvio Stacul, Guido Grisi, Maria Assunta Cova

Published in: Insights into Imaging | Issue 4/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

This study was done to assess the clinical-diagnostic impact and cost of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) versus computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the characterisation of focal liver lesions.

Materials and methods

CEUS with sulphur hexafluoride-filled microbubbles (SonoVue bolus 2.4 ml) was performed in 157 patients with 160 focal liver lesions identified by other diagnostic techniques. CEUS images were obtained during the arterial (15 to 35 s from contrast injection), portal venous (40 to 70 s) and late phase (up to 300 s from microbubble injection). Contrast-enhanced CT was performed with a 64-row multidetector CT. MRI was performed before and after administration of the liver-specific contrast agent gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA). A patient-by-patient activity-based cost analysis was performed.

Results

CEUS led to a change in the diagnostic workup in 131/157 patients (83.4 %) and in the therapeutic workup in 93/157 patients (59.2 %). CEUS allowed for the final diagnosis to be established in 133/157 patients (84.7 %). The full cost of CEUS was lower than that of contrast-enhanced CT and MR imaging.

Conclusions

CEUS determined a change in the diagnostic and therapeutic workup in the characterisation of focal liver lesions and reduced the full costs of the diagnostic process.

Main messages:

• CEUS allows a correct diagnosis in more than 80 % of focal liver lesions.
• CEUS has a significant impact on the diagnosis of focal liver lesions.
• CEUS examination of focal liver lesions reduces total costs.
• Dynamic MR with hepato-specific contrast medium remains the reference standard for lesion characterisation.
• CEUS is low-cost, versatile and accurate in the characterisation of focal liver lesions.
Literature
1.
Quaia E, Degobbis F, Tona G, Mosconi E, Bertolotto M, Pozzi Mucelli R (2004) Aspetti differenziali dell’enhancement in diversi tipi di lesioni focali epatiche dopo somministrazione di mezzo di contrasto ecografico. Radiol Med 107:155–165PubMed
2.
3.
Lencioni R, Cioni D, Bartolozzi C (2005) Focal Liver Lesions. Detection, Characterization, Ablation. Berlin Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag
4.
Quaia E (2011) The real capabilities of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the characterization of solid focal liver lesions. Eur Radiol 21(3):457–462PubMedCrossRef
5.
Bartolotta TV, Taibbi A, Midiri M, Matranga D, Solbiati L, Lagalla R (2011) Indeterminate focal liver lesions incidentally discovered at gray-scale US: role of contrast-enhanced sonography. Invest Radiol 46(2):106–115PubMedCrossRef
6.
7.
8.
9.
Sporea I, Sirli R, Martie A et al (2010) How useful is contrast enhanced ultrasonography for the characterization of focal liver lesions? J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 19(4):393–398PubMed
10.
Catala V, Nicolau C, Vilana R et al (2007) Characterization of focal liver lesions: comparative study of contrastenhanced ultrasound versus spiral computed tomography. Eur Radiol 17:1066–1073PubMedCrossRef
11.
Bartolotta TV, Taibbi A, Midiri M et al (2010) Characterisation of focal liver lesions undetermined at grey-scale US: contrast-enhanced US versus 64-row MDCT and MRI with liver-specific constrast agent. Radiol Med 115:714–731PubMedCrossRef
12.
Faccioli N, D’Onofrio M, Comai A, Cugini C (2007) Contrast enhanced ultrasonography in the characterization of benign focal liver lesions: activity-based cost analysis. Radiol Med 112:810–820
13.
Romanini L, Passamonti M, Aini L, Cabassa P et al (2007) Economic assessment of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for evaluation of focal liver lesions: a multicentre Italian experience. Eur Radiol Suppl 17(suppl 6):F99–F106
14.
Tranquart F, Correas JM, Ladam Marci V et al (2009) Real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the evaluation of focal liver lesions: diagnostic efficacy and economical issues from a French multicentric study. J Radiol 90(1Pt2):109–122PubMedCrossRef
15.
Sirli R, Sporea I, Marte A et al (2010) Contrast enhanced ultrasound in focal liver lesions—a cost efficiency study. Med Ultrason 12(4):280–285PubMed
16.
Albrecht T, Blomley M, Bolondi L et al (2004) Guidelines for the use of contrast agents in ultrasound. Ultraschall Med 25:249–256PubMedCrossRef
17.
Claudon M, Dietrich CF, Choi BI et al (2013) Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the liver—update 2012: A WFUMB-EFSUMB initiative in cooperation with representatives of AFSUMB, AIUM, ASUM, FLAUS and ICUS. Ultrasound Med Biol 39:187–210PubMedCrossRef
18.
Quaia E, Calliada F, Bertolotto M, Rossi S, Garioni L, Rosa L, Pozzi-Mucelli R (2004) Characterization of focal liver lesions with contrast-specific US modes and a sulfur hexafluoride-filled microbubble contrast agent: diagnostic performance and confidence. Radiology 232:420–430
19.
Stacul F, Sironi D, Grisi G, Belgrano M, Salvi A, Cova M (2009) 64-slice CT coronary angiography versus conventional coronary angiography: activity-based cost analysis. Radiol Med 114:239–252
20.
Drummond MF, O’Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW (1997) Basic types of economic evaluation. In: Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programs. 2nd edn Oxford University Press, Oxford, England, pp:6–17
21.
Molins IG, Font JM, Alvaro JC, Navarro JL, Gil MF, Rodriguez CM (2010) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in diagnosis and characterization of focal hepatic lesions. World J Radiol 2(12):455–462PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
22.
Claudon M, Cosgrove D, Albrecht T, EFSUMB study group et al (2008) Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Ultraschall Med 29:28–44PubMedCrossRef
23.
24.
Sporea I, Badea R, Martie A, Sirli R, Socaciu M, Popescu A, Danila M (2011) Contrast enhanced ultrasound for the characterization of focal liver lesions. Med Ultrason 13(1):38–44PubMed
25.
Madsen HH, Rasmussen F (2011) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in oncology (2011) Cancer Imaging 11 Spec No A: S167-73
26.
Wang ZL, Tang J, Weskott HO, Li JL, Wang W, Yk L, An LC, Xu JH (2008) Undeterminated focal liver lesions on gray-scale ultrasound in patients with fatty liver: characterization with contrast-enhanced ultrasound. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 23(10):1511–1519PubMedCrossRef
27.
Quaia E (2012) Solid focal liver lesions indeterminate by contrast-enhanced CT o MR imaging: the added diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Abdom Imaging 37(4):580–590PubMedCrossRef
28.
Larsen LP (2010) Role of contrast enhanced ultrasonography in the assessment of hepatic metastases: A review. World J Hepatol 2(1):8–15PubMedCentralPubMed
29.
Trillaud H, Bruel JM, Valette PJ, Vilgrain V, Schmutz G et al (2009) Characterization of focal liver lesions with SonoVue-enhanced sonography: international multicenter-study in comparison to CT and MRI 15(30):3748–56
30.
Cohen MD, ChB Donald R, Hutchins GD et al (2000) Activity-based cost analysis: a method of analyzing the financial and operating performance of academic radiology departments. Radiology 215:708–716PubMedCrossRef
31.
Gazelle GS, McMahon PM, Beinfeld MT et al (2005) Cost-effectiveness analysis in the assessment of diagnostic imging technoligies. Radiology 235:361–370PubMedCrossRef
32.
33.
Carlos R (2004) Introduction to cost-effectiveness analysis in radiology: principles and practical application critical thinking skills symposium. Acad Radiol 11:141–148PubMedCrossRef
34.
Hatanaka K, Kudo M, Minami Y et al (2008) Differential diagnosis of hepatic tumors: value of contrast-enhanced harmonic sonography using the newly developed contrast agent. Sonazoid Intervirology b 51(01):61–69CrossRef
35.
Korenaga K, Korenaga M, Furukawa M et al (2009) Usefulness of Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison with pathological diagnosis and superparamagnetic iron oxide magnetic resonance images. J Gastroenterol 44:733–741PubMedCrossRef
36.
Bertoni M, De Rosa B, Grisi G (2014) Managerial control and cost accounting systems in national health care services: a case study. In: Kandzija, Vinko, Kumar, Andrej (eds) Economic Integrations, Competition and Cooperation. University of Rijeka, Rijeka (HR), pp 504–521
Metadata
Title
Activity-based cost analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) related to the diagnostic impact in focal liver lesion characterisation
Authors
Arianna Lorusso
Emilio Quaia
Gabriele Poillucci
Fulvio Stacul
Guido Grisi
Maria Assunta Cova
Publication date
01-08-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Insights into Imaging / Issue 4/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1869-4101
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-015-0402-4

Other articles of this Issue 4/2015

Insights into Imaging 4/2015 Go to the issue

Report

Summary of the European Directive 2013/59/Euratom: essentials for health professionals in radiology

Review

Primary fallopian tube carcinoma: review of MR imaging findings

Review

False positive and false negative diagnoses of prostate cancer at multi-parametric prostate MRI in active surveillance

Pictorial Review

Spectrum of Imaging Findings in Paget’s Disease of the Breast—A Pictorial Review

Review

Imaging body composition in cancer patients: visceral obesity, sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity may impact on clinical outcome

Opinion

Imaging patients with renal colic—consider ultrasound first