US or CT when it Comes to Monitoring Hepatic Metastases in Patients with Primary GIT and Breast Cancer? Comparative Results of Sensitivity and Specificity of CT and US
Keywords:
breast cancer, CT, GIT cancer, liver metastases, USAbstract
Malignant diseases are one of the greatest health challenges at the global level and a major social, public health and economic problem in the 21st century with the three most common types of cancer: lung cancer, breast cancer and colorectal cancer. Radiodiagnostics plays a major role in detecting the primary disease, its stage, the presence or absence of secondary deposits, response to therapy, and monitoring for possible relapses. The current challenge for radiodiagnostic methods is to provide aaccurate, non-invasive method that is highly sensitive and specific and well-tolerated by the patient. We conducted a prospective comparative study over a period of 12 months, which included 82 subjects, patients with metastatic liver disease with primary gastrointestinal tract cancer and breast cancer. Two CT contrast examinations were performed in three phases, as well as four US examinations over a period of 3 months, both examinations within 12 months.The aim of the study was to determine the sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound in relation to all phases of CT taken as the gold standard for detection of hepatic metastases. From the results obtained, US showed the highest sensitivity (100%) and specificity (92.31%) in patients with GIT cancer in hyperechoic changes compared to the arterial phase of CT, while in patients with breast cancer, the sensitivity of US is highest in ring changes (85.71%), and the specificity in isoechoic changes (95%). Regarding the venous phase, US did not show sensitivity for the detection of hepatic lesions in patients with cancer originating from the GIT, while in patients with breast cancer it showed maximum sensitivity (100%) in the detection of ring lesions, and maximum specificity for hypoechoic lesions (100%). US was shown to be sensitive compared to late-phase CT in detecting isoechoic changes in patients with breast cancer (83.33%), but insufficiently sensitive for changes in patients with GIT cancer. The specificity of US is maximum for hypoechoic changes in patients with GIT cancer (100%), and isoechoic changes in patients with breast cancer (88.57%).
References
Bray F, Laversanne M, Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2024 May-Jun;74(3):229-263. doi: 10.3322/caac.21834. Epub 2024 Apr 4. PMID: 38572751.
Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS, Rees CA, Pollack JR, Ross DT, Johnsen H, Akslen LA, Fluge O, Pergamenschikov A, Williams C, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2000;406:747–752. doi: 10.1038/35021093
Redig AJ, McAllister SS. Breast cancer as a systemic disease: a view of metastasis. J Intern Med. 2013;274:113–126. doi: 10.1111/joim.12084.
Siegel RL, Wagle NS, Cercek A, Smith RA, Jemal A. Colorectal cancer statistics, 2023. CA Cancer J Clin. 2023; 73(3): 233-254. doi:10.3322/caac.21772
Griscom JT, Wolf PS. Liver Metastasis. [Updated 2023 Aug 14]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK553118/
C. Dromain, C. Caramella, P. Dartigues, D. Goere, M. Ducreux, F. Deschamps,Liver, lung and peritoneal metastases in colorectal cancers: Is the patient still curable? What should the radiologist know, Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging, Volume 95, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 513-523,ISSN 2211-5684, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2014.03.011.
S. Gaujoux, D. Goere, F. Dumont, A. Souadka, C. Dromain, M. Ducreux, et al.Complete radiological response of colorectal liver metastases after chemotherapy: what can we expect?Dig Surg, 28 (2) (2014), pp. 114-120, Google Scholar
Suramo I, Päivänsalo M, Pamilo M. Unidentified Liver Metastases at Ultrasonography or Computed Tomography. Acta Radiologica Diagnosis. 1984;25(5):385-389. doi:10.1177/028418518402500507
Wernecke K, Rummeny E, Bongartz G, Vassallo P, Kivelitz D, Wiesmann W, Peters PE, Reers B, Reiser M, Pircher W. Detection of hepatic masses in patients with carcinoma: comparative sensitivities of sonography, CT, and MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991;157:731–739. doi: 10.2214/ajr.157.4.1892027
Bernatik T, Strobel D, Hahn EG, Becker D. Detection of liver metastases: comparison of contrast-enhanced wide-band harmonic imaging with conventional ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med. 2001;20:509-515
Stang A, Keles H, Hentschke S, Seydewitz C, Keuchel M, Pohland C, Dahlke J, Weilert H, Wessling J, Malzfeldt E. Real-time ultrasonography-computed tomography fusion imaging for staging of hepatic metastatic involvement in patients with colorectal cancer: initial results from comparison to US seeing separate CT images and to multidetector-row CT alone. Invest Radiol. 2010 Aug;45(8):491-501. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181ddd3da. PMID: 20458251.
Quaia, E., D’Onofrio, M., Palumbo, A. et al. Comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography versus baseline ultrasound and contrast-enhanced computed tomography in metastatic disease of the liver: diagnostic performance and confidence. Eur Radiol 16, 1599–1609 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0192-7
Cantisani V, Ricci P, Erturk M, Pagliara E, Drudi F, Calliada F, Mortele K, D'Ambrosio U, Marigliano C, Catalano C, Marin D, Di Seri M, Longo F, Passariello R. Detection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: prospective evaluation of gray scale US versus SonoVue® low mechanical index real time-enhanced US as compared with multidetector-CT or Gd-BOPTA-MRI. Ultraschall Med. 2010 Oct;31(5):500-5. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1109751. Epub 2010 Apr 20. PMID: 20408122.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who submit papers with this journal agree to the following terms.