Dahiya, Nirvikar

Diagnostic criteria to classify severity of internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis vary across vascular laboratories. Consensus-based criteria, proposed by the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound in 2003 (SRUCC), have been broadly implemented but have not been adequately validated. We conducted a multicentered, retrospective correlative imaging study of duplex ultrasound versus catheter angiography for evaluation of severity of ICA stenosis. Velocity data were abstracted from bilateral duplex studies performed between 1/1/2009 and 12/31/2015 and studies were interpreted using SRUCC. Percentage ICA stenosis was determined using North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) methodology. Receiver operating characteristic analysis evaluated the performance of SRUCC parameters compared with angiography. Of 448 ICA sides (from 224 patients), 299 ICA sides (from 167 patients) were included. Agreement between duplex ultrasound and angiography was moderate (κ = 0.42), with overestimation of degree of stenosis for both moderate (50–69%) and severe (⩾ 70%) ICA lesions. The primary SRUCC parameter for ⩾ 50% ICA stenosis of peak-systolic velocity (PSV) of ⩾ 125 cm/sec did not meet prespecified thresholds for adequate sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy (sensitivity 97.8%, specificity 64.2%, accuracy 74.5%). Test performance was improved by raising the PSV threshold to ⩾ 180 cm/sec (sensitivity 93.3%, specificity 81.6%, accuracy 85.2%) or by adding the additional parameter of ICA/common carotid artery (CCA) PSV ratio ⩾ 2.0 (sensitivity 94.3%, specificity 84.3%, accuracy 87.4%). For ⩾ 70% ICA stenosis, analysis was limited by a low number of cases with angiographically severe disease. Interpretation of carotid duplex examinations using SRUCC resulted in significant overestimation of severity of ICA stenosis when compared with angiography; raising the PSV threshold for ⩾ 50% ICA stenosis to ⩾ 180 cm/sec as a single parameter or requiring the ICA/CCA PSV ratio ⩾ 2.0 in addition to PSV of ⩾ 125 cm/sec for laboratories using the SRUCC is recommended to improve the accuracy of carotid duplex examinations.

Intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) is a valuable adjunctive tool that can provide real-time diagnostic information in surgery that has the potential to alter patient management and decrease complications. Lesion localization, characterization and staging can be performed, as well as surveying for additional lesions and metastatic disease. IOUS is commonly used in the liver for hepatic metastatic disease and hepatocellular carcinoma, in the pancreas for neuroendocrine tumors, and in the kidney for renal cell carcinoma. IOUS allows real-time evaluation of vascular patency and perfusion in organ transplantation and allows for early intervention for anastomotic complications. It can also be used to guide intraoperative procedures such as biopsy, fiducial placement, radiation, or ablation. A variety of adjuncts including microbubble contrast and elastography may provide additional information at IOUS. It is important for the radiologist to be familiar with the available equipment, common clinical indications, technique, relevant anatomy and intraoperative imaging appearance to optimize performance of this valuable imaging modality.

Objectives We analyzed growth rates of benign ovarian serous cystadenomas and cystadenofibromas to understand what percentage would show a volume doubling time (DT) of less than 3 years, between 3 and 5 years, or greater than 5 years. Methods We retrospectively reviewed pathology records (January 1, 2014, to June 30, 2019) to find all surgically excised ovarian serous cystadenomas and cystadenofibromas. Imaging records were then reviewed to identify those that had been confidently identified with ultrasound imaging, magnetic resonance imaging, or computed tomography at least twice before surgical removal, with at least a 60‐day interval between studies. Three orthogonal measurements were recorded on the first and last imaging studies on which the mass was detected, with volume calculations by the prolate formula (product of 3 measurements multiplied by 0.52). The volume DT was calculated and grouped into 1 of 5 categories: (1) DT of less than 1 year; (2) DT of 1 to 3 years; (3) DT of 3 to 5 years; (4) DT of 5 to 10 years; and (5) no growth (any mass with a DT >10 years or showing a decrease in volume). Results A total of 102 of 536 cystadenomas and 44 of 227 cystadenofibromas met inclusion criteria. Of the 146 tumors, 40 (27.4%) had a DT of less than 1 year; 38 (26.0%) had a DT of 1 to 3 years; 22 (15.1%) had a DT of 3 to 5 years; 10 (6.8%) had a DT of 5 to 10 years; and 36 (24.7%) showed no growth. Conclusions A total of 53.4% of ovarian serous cystadenomas/cystadenofibromas have a DT of less than 3 years; 15.1% have a DT between 3 and 5 years; and 31.5% have a DT of greater than 5 years or show no growth.

ObjectivesTo determine whether renal transplant diagnoses substantially change when 2 biopsy sites are chosen and whether contrast‐enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has value for targeting the second site.MethodsWe prospectively enrolled 40 patients undergoing ultrasound‐guided renal transplant biopsy within 2 years of transplant: 20, surveillance; and 20, for cause. A CEUS examination was performed to identify cortical regions with subjectively altered flow. One biopsy was performed at the operator‐preferred (primary) site regardless of CEUS findings. Another biopsy was done at a second location, either targeted to an area in which CEUS perfusion findings differed from the primary site (targeted) or at a random location (secondary) if no other area differed. Specimens were randomly labeled A or B; pathologists were blinded to the CEUS result and biopsy location. Location‐specific CEUS assessments were recorded. Pathologic results were compared, including acute and chronic Banff scores and any new findings from the targeted or secondary biopsy.ResultsForty patients were enrolled between January 2016 and December 2018. No location‐specific pathologic differences correlated with differences in CEUS assessments. The second biopsy provided additional information that changed management in 4 of 40 patients (10.0% [95% confidence interval, 2.8%–23.7%]). Major bleeding complications occurred in 3 of 40 (7.5%) patients.ConclusionsContrast‐enhanced ultrasound targeting was not useful. Major bleeding complications were higher than expected, possibly due to the additional biopsy away from the operator‐preferred location. Obtaining a second renal transplant biopsy from a substantially different area than the initial operator‐preferred location provided additional clinically useful information in 10% of patients.

ObjectivesThe study aim was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the uterine sliding sign in predicting deeply infiltrating endometriosis in the setting of non‐physician sonographers performing but not interpreting the maneuver. The impact of uterine sliding sign has not been previously demonstrated in this practice setting.MethodsPhysicians' remote interpretations of transvaginal ultrasound examinations in 2016, before uterine sliding sign, were compared to examinations in 2019 after addition of uterine sliding sign to determine the diagnostic rates. Surgical and histopathological results were reviewed to determine sensitivity and specificity of the respective exam techniques.ResultsTwo hundred eighty‐five transvaginal ultrasounds were performed in 2016 and 390 sliding sign ultrasounds in 2019. The number of deeply infiltrating endometriosis cases identified increased significantly from 2% to 6% during the study period (chi‐square, Fisher's exact test p = .012). The sensitivity and specificity of routine pelvic sonography for detecting deeply infiltrating endometriosis improved from 36%/94% to 68%/98%.ConclusionsUterine sliding sign videos should be included in the standard sonographic protocol for patients presenting with chronic pelvic pain, endometriosis history, or sonographic evidence of endometriosis in the setting of physicians interpreting sonographic images obtained by non‐physicians.

Abstract Ultrasound (US)–guided intervention is a well-established medical procedure and offers advantages such as real-time guidance, portability, reduced cost, shortened procedure time compared with computed tomography, and lack of ionizing radiation. Ultrasound contrast agents (UCAs) are a useful adjunct to US-guided procedures. The addition of microbubble UCAs during US-guided interventions can assist with biopsy planning and lesion selection, aid in identification of target lesions, and direct the biopsy toward viable tissue. Ultrasound contrast agents have been in use outside of the United States for many years and have been used off label at select institutions across the United States before the Food and Drug Administration approval of Lumason (Bracco Diagnostics) for liver lesion evaluation in April 2016. After Food and Drug Administration approval, the use of UCAs has expanded rapidly, and UCAs are being used for a variety of clinical applications. Ultrasound contrast agents have been shown to be safe, and there is no renal toxicity. In this article, we will discuss the indications and techniques for using contrast-enhanced ultrasound during US-guided interventions, and we will present case examples where contrast-enhanced ultrasound added value.