Interobserver Variation of the Bolus-and-Burst Method for Pancreatic Perfusion with Dynamic – Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound

Abstract

Purpose Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound (DCE-US) can be used for calculating organ perfusion. By combining bolus injection with burst replenishment, the actual mean transit time (MTT) can be estimated. Blood volume (BV) can be obtained by scaling the data to a vessel on the imaging plane. The study aim was to test interobserver agreement for repeated recordings using the same ultrasound scanner and agreement between results on two different scanner systems.

Materials and Methods Ten patients under evaluation for exocrine pancreatic failure were included. Each patient was scanned two times on a GE Logiq E9 scanner, by two different observers, and once on a Philips IU22 scanner, after a bolus of 1.5 ml Sonovue. A 60-second recording of contrast enhancement was performed before the burst and the scan continued for another 30 s for reperfusion. We performed data analysis using MATLAB-based DCE-US software. An artery in the same depth as the region of interest (ROI) was used for scaling. The measurements were compared using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland Altman plots.

Results The interobserver agreement on the Logiq E9 for MTT (ICC=0.83, confidence interval (CI) 0.46–0.96) was excellent. There was poor agreement for MTT between the Logiq E9 and the IU22 (ICC=−0.084, CI −0.68–0.58). The interobserver agreement for blood volume measurements was excellent on the Logiq E9 (ICC=0.9286, CI 0.7250–0.98) and between scanners (ICC=0.86, CI=0.50–0.97).

Conclusion Interobserver agreement was excellent using the same scanner for both parameters and between scanners for BV, but the comparison between two scanners did not yield acceptable agreement for MTT. This was probably due to incomplete bursting of bubbles in some of the recordings on the IU22.

Key words

interobserver - dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound - perfusion - pancreas

• References

• 1 Dietrich CF, Averkiou MA, Correas JM, Lassau N, Leen E, Piscaglia F. An EFSUMB introduction into Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (DCE-US) for quantification of tumour perfusion. Ultraschall in der Medizin 2012; 33: 344-351
• 2 Frohlich E, Muller R, Cui XW, Schreiber-Dietrich D, Dietrich CF. Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound for quantification of tissue perfusion. Journal of ultrasound in medicine: Official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 2015; 34: 179-196
• 3 Claudon M, Dietrich CF, Choi BI, Cosgrove DO, Kudo M, Nolsoe CP. et al. 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 in Medicine & Biology 2013; 39: 187-210
• 4 Piscaglia F, Nolsoe C, Dietrich CF, Cosgrove DO, Gilja OH, Bachmann Nielsen M. et al. The EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations on the Clinical Practice of Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS): update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. Ultraschall in der Medizin. 2012; 33: 33-59
• 5 Hudson JM, Williams R, Tremblay-Darveau C, Sheeran PS, Milot L, Bjarnason GA. et al. Dynamic contrast enhanced ultrasound for therapy monitoring. European journal of radiology 2015; 84: 1650-1657
• 6 Tang MX, Mulvana H, Gauthier T, Lim AK, Cosgrove DO, Eckersley RJ. et al. Quantitative contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging: A review of sources of variability. Interface focus 2011; 1: 520-539
• 7 Gauthier TP, Averkiou MA, Leen EL. Perfusion quantification using dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound: the impact of dynamic range and gain on time-intensity curves. Ultrasonics 2011; 51: 102-106
• 8 Gauthier TP, Chebil M, Peronneau P, Lassau N. In vitro evaluation of the impact of ultrasound scanner settings and contrast bolus volume on time-intensity curves. Ultrasonics 2012; 52: 12-19
• 9 Lassau N, Bonastre J, Kind M, Vilgrain V, Lacroix J, Cuinet M. et al. Validation of dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound in predicting outcomes of antiangiogenic therapy for solid tumors: The French multicenter support for innovative and expensive techniques study. Investigative radiology 2014; 49: 794-800
• 10 Zink F, Kratzer W, Schmidt S, Oeztuerk S, Mason RA, Porzner M. et al. Comparison of two high-end ultrasound systems for contrast-enhanced ultrasound quantification of mural microvascularity in crohn’s disease. Ultraschall in der Medizin 2016; 37: 74-81
• 11 Hudson JM, Leung K, Burns PN. The lognormal perfusion model for disruption replenishment measurements of blood flow: In vivo validation. Ultrasound in medicine & biology 2011; 37: 1571-1578
• 12 Gauthier M, Tabarout F, Leguerney I, Polrot M, Pitre S, Peronneau P. et al. Assessment of quantitative perfusion parameters by dynamic contrast-enhanced sonography using a deconvolution method: An in vitro and in vivo study. Journal of ultrasound in medicine: official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 2012; 31: 595-608
• 13 Jirik R, Nylund K, Gilja OH, Mezl M, Harabis V, Kolar R. et al. Ultrasound perfusion analysis combining bolus-tracking and burst-replenishment. IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control 2013; 60: 310-319
• 14 Nylund K, Jirik R, Mezl M, Leh S, Hausken T, Pfeffer F. et al. Quantitative contrast-enhanced ultrasound comparison between inflammatory and fibrotic lesions in patients with Crohn’s disease. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 2013; 39: 1197-1206
• 15 Jirik RNK, Taxt T, Mezl Martin, Hausken T, Harabis V, Kolar R, Standara M, Gilja OH. Parametric ultrasound perfusion analysis combining bolus tracking and replenishment 2012 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium: IEEE. 2012; 1323–1326
• 16 Jirik R, Soucek K, Mezl M, Bartos M, Drazanova E, Drafi F. et al. Blind deconvolution in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and ultrasound. Conference proceedings: Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society Annual Conference 2014; 2014: 4276-4279
• 17 Engjom TLB, Nylund K, Erchinger F, Gilja OH, Dimcevski G. 229 Pancreatic genotype–phenotype co-variations in cystic fibrosis. Journal of Cystic Fibrosis 2015
• 18 Schafer S, Nylund K, Saevik F, Engjom T, Mezl M, Jirik R. et al. Semi-automatic motion compensation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound images from abdominal organs for perfusion analysis. Computers in biology and medicine 2015; 63: 229-237
• 19 Lewis MP, Lo SK, Reber PU, Patel A, Gloor B, Todd KE. et al. Endoscopic measurement of pancreatic tissue perfusion in patients with chronic pancreatitis and control patients. Gastrointestinal endoscopy 2000; 51: 195-199
• 20 Atri M, Hudson JM, Sinaei M, Williams R, Milot L, Moshonov H. et al. Impact of acquisition method and region of interest placement on inter-observer agreement and measurement of tumor response to targeted therapy using dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 2016; 42: 763-768
• 21 Gauthier M, Leguerney I, Thalmensi J, Chebil M, Parisot S, Peronneau P. et al. Estimation of intra-operator variability in perfusion parameter measurements using DCE-US. World Journal of Radiology 2011; 3: 70-81
• 22 Rognin NG, Frinking P, Costa M, Arditi M.editors. In-vivo perfusion quantification by contrast ultrasound: Validation of the use of linearized video data vs. raw RF data. 2008 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium; 2008 2-5 Nov. 2008;
• 23 Erchinger F, Dimcevski G, Engjom T, Gilja OH. Transabdominal ultrasonography of the pancreas: basic and new aspects. Imaging in Medicine 2011; 3: 11