2024
DOI: 10.1186/s40644-023-00651-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Value of high frame rate contrast enhanced ultrasound in gallbladder wall thickening in non-acute setting

Lianhua Zhu,
Nan Li,
Yaqiong Zhu
et al.

Abstract: Background Ultrasound (US) has been widely used in screening and differential diagnosis of gallbladder wall thickening (GWT). However, the sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing wall-thickening type gallbladder cancer are limited, leading to delayed treatment or overtreatment. We aim to explore the value of high frame rate contrast enhanced ultrasound (H-CEUS) in distinguishing wall-thickening type gallbladder cancer (malignant) from GWT mimicking malignancy (benign). … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 26 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In routine ultrasound diagnosis of malignant gallbladder cancer, the SE was 65.3%–82.5%, with significant variation. Some researchers have explored the value of high-frame-rate contrast-enhanced ultrasound for gallbladder wall thickening in nonacute settings ( 19 ). The study determined that the SE, SP, and AC of the GB-RADS for diagnosing malignant gallbladder cancer were only 68.75%, 73.33%, and 71.74%, respectively, which were lower than those in our study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In routine ultrasound diagnosis of malignant gallbladder cancer, the SE was 65.3%–82.5%, with significant variation. Some researchers have explored the value of high-frame-rate contrast-enhanced ultrasound for gallbladder wall thickening in nonacute settings ( 19 ). The study determined that the SE, SP, and AC of the GB-RADS for diagnosing malignant gallbladder cancer were only 68.75%, 73.33%, and 71.74%, respectively, which were lower than those in our study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%