• Users Online:263
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 

 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 55-60

Contrast-enhanced (endoscopic) ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound elastography in gastrointestinal stromal tumors


1 Caritas-Krankenhaus, Bad Mergentheim, Germany
2 Krankenhaus Märkisch Oderland, Wriezen, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg, Germany
3 Klinikum Meiningen, Meiningen, Germany
4 Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
5 The Department of Medical Ultrasound, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
6 Research Center in Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Craiova, Romania

Date of Submission17-Jul-2016
Date of Acceptance26-Dec-2016
Date of Web Publication15-Feb-2017

Correspondence Address:
Andre Ignee
Caritas Hospital, Bad Mergentheim
Germany
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2303-9027.200216

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Background and Objectives: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) represent the largest group of subepithelial tumors (SET) of the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract. They may show malignant behavior, in contrast to other SET. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is frequently used to characterize SET. With the introduction of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) into EUS (CE-EUS), distinct enhancement patterns can be detected. In the presented study, the characteristic features of CE-EUS in GIST are analyzed and compared with those of other SET. Materials and Methods: Consecutive patients from four centers with SET of the upper and middle GI tract were included and received endoscopic or transcutaneous CEUS. The results were compared with EUS-guided tissue acquisition, forceps biopsy, or surgical resection. Results: Forty-two out of 62 (68%) patients had SET of the stomach, 17/62 (27%) of the small intestine, 2/62 (3%) of the esophagus, and 1/62 (2%) extraintestinal. Eighty-one percent underwent surgery. Leiomyoma was found in 5/62 (8%) and GIST in 57/62 patients (92%). Thirty-nine out of 57 (68%) patients had GIST lesions in the stomach, 17/57 (30%) had GIST of the small intestine, and 1/57 (2%) patients had extraintestinal GISTs. GIST size was 62.6 ± 42.1 (16–200) mm. Hyperenhancement had a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of 98%, 100%, 100%, 93%, and 98% for the diagnosis of GIST. Fifty out of 57 patients with GIST (88%) showed avascular areas in the center of the lesions. Conclusion: CE-EUS and CEUS show hyperenhancement and avascular areas in a high percentage of GIST but not in leiomyoma. Thus, GIST and leiomyoma can be discriminated accurately.

Keywords: BR1 (Sonovue), contrast-enhanced ultrasound, endoscopic ultrasound, gastrointestinal stromal tumor, sonovue, subepithelial tumors


How to cite this article:
Ignee A, Jenssen C, Hocke M, Dong Y, Wang WP, Cui XW, Woenckhaus M, Iordache S, Saftoiu A, Schuessler G, Dietrich CF. Contrast-enhanced (endoscopic) ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound elastography in gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Endosc Ultrasound 2017;6:55-60

How to cite this URL:
Ignee A, Jenssen C, Hocke M, Dong Y, Wang WP, Cui XW, Woenckhaus M, Iordache S, Saftoiu A, Schuessler G, Dietrich CF. Contrast-enhanced (endoscopic) ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound elastography in gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Endosc Ultrasound [serial online] 2017 [cited 2020 Oct 24];6:55-60. Available from: http://www.eusjournal.com/text.asp?2017/6/1/55/200216


  Introduction Top


Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) represent the largest group of subepithelial tumors (SET) of the stomach, duodenum and small intestine but occur only very seldom in the esophagus and large intestine. In contrast to leiomyomas, lipomas and most other SETs, they may have a malignant behavior. Therefore, after detection of a subepithelial lesion in the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract, correct characterization is crucial to start an assessment whether surgery would be an appropriate approach to the patient.[1]

In contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), GIST has necrotic or unenhancing areas in about 50%, if larger than 50 mm. Therefore, “necrotic areas is a sign with a high positive predictive value for the diagnosis of GIST, but the negative predictive value is low.[2] In short, exclusion of GIST is frequently not possible.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has become the method of choice for the characterization of upper GI tract disease, especially in subepithelial lesions as an adjunct to endoscopy. However, endosonographic discrimination of GISTs from benign subepithelial GI tumors, in particular leiomyoma, may be difficult and is based on minor differences of shape, echogenicity and homogeneity.[3],[4],[5] In particular, necrotic areas cannot be displayed properly with conventional EUS. Thus, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is used to display microperfusion on the capillary level with a high specificity for the contrast signal due to software reasons and the strict intravascular behavior of the contrast agent.[6]

Recently, real-time contrast-enhanced EUS (CE-EUS) with low mechanical index imaging based on contrast-specific harmonic imaging modes has become available.[7],[8] A second advanced imaging technique used with EUS is real-time EUS elastography.[9],[10] Based on previous experience in other tumors, we postulated that CE-EUS and EUS elastography might be helpful for discrimination of hypoechoic subepithelial GI tumors, in particular for discrimination of GIST and leiomyoma.


  Materials and Methods Top


All consecutive patients from four tertiary referral centers with SETs of the upper and middle GI tract submitted for US and EUS evaluation were analyzed and their data prospectively evaluated. All patients gave informed consent, and institutional board approval had been received for the study.

All patients with SETs of the upper GI tract were evaluated using EUS. In patients with SETs not within the reach of upper GI EUS, in particular SETs of the small intestine, transabdominal US was performed. EUS was performed using Hitachi Preirus and Hitachi Ascendus with Pentax EG UTK 3870 or Pentax EG URK 3670 scanners. First, the lesion was identified using the endoscopic image. Consecutively, EUS examination was performed. The size, shape, layer of origin and vascularization with conventional color or power Doppler ultrasound were analyzed. CE-EUS was performed after injection of 4.8 mL of Sonovue (Bracco, Italy). Using real-time imaging, the enhancement pattern was analyzed with special focus on the enhancement pattern and possible foci without contrast uptake. Real-time elastography has been also performed, using a region of interest that included at least 50% of the tumor, as well as surrounding structures. Percutaneous US was performed using Toshiba Aplio, GE Logiq E9, or Hitachi Ascendus.

The final diagnosis was established by EUS-guided tissue acquisition, bite-on-bite forceps biopsy, or surgical resection with pathological examination and immunohistochemistry.


  Results Top


Sixty-two patients met the inclusion criteria. Forty-two out of 62 (68%) patients had SETs of the stomach, 17/62 (27%) of the small intestine, 2/62 (3%) of the esophagus, and 1/62 (2%) extraintestinal. Fifty out of 62 patients (81%) underwent surgery, in 11/62 (18%) cytology was obtained by EUS-guided biopsy and in 1/62 (2%) histology was obtained by endoscopic forceps biopsy. Histology revealed leiomyoma in 5/62 (8%) and GIST in 57/62 patients (92%).

Major results

All patients but 1 (61/62, 98%) had GISTs with blue pattern in elastography, 13 of them (13/61, 21%) had heterogeneous patterns, and 48/61 (79%) had homogenous patterns. Four of five leiomyoma showed a blue pattern in elastography (80%).

All patients except 1 (56/57, 98%) had a hyperenhancing GIST in CE-EUS. The hypoenhancing lesion was a 30-mm low-risk GIST in the stomach. All leiomyomas showed hypoenhancement [Figure 1]. In our cohort, hyperenhancement had a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of 98%, 100%, 100%, 93% and 98%.
Figure 1: Typical enhancement pattern of leiomyoma; leiomyomas show frequently very low contrast uptake

Click here to view


Fifty out of 57 patients with GIST (88%) showed avascular areas in the center of the lesions which we interpreted as necrosis [Figure 2],[Figure 3],[Figure 4]. There was a trend toward smaller size for GIST without avascular areas (65.8 ± 43 [16–200] vs. 39.6 ± 26.9 [22–90], P = 0.062). In the current group, lesions with avascular areas developed no metastasis and were never classified as high risk. Lesions without avascular areas were all located in the stomach. The findings are presented in [Table 1].
Figure 2: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors in contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound showing hypervascularization and displaying avascular areas

Click here to view
Figure 3: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors in contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound showing less pronounced hypervascularization and displaying small avascular areas

Click here to view
Figure 4: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors in contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound showing pronounced hypervascularization and displaying a tiny avascular area in the center

Click here to view
Table 1. Characteristics of patients and lesions

Click here to view


Additional results

Two out of five leiomyoma (40%) were found in the esophagus, and no GIST was found in the esophagus.

Thirty-nine out of 57 (68%) patients had GIST lesions in the stomach, 17/57 (30%) had GIST of the small intestine, and 1/57 (2%) patients had extraintestinal GISTs. GIST size was 62.6 ± 42.1 [16–200] mm. There were 26/57 (46%) patients with high-risk GISTs, 17/57 (30%) with intermediate-risk GIST, 14/57 (25%) patients with low-risk GISTs, and 0/62 (0%) with very low-risk GISTs.

Seven out of 26 (27%) patients with high-risk GIST had simultaneous liver metastases. The majority of patients with liver metastases (9/62, 15%) had high-risk GIST (7/9, 78%), but 2/9 (22%) patients with liver metastases had intermediate histology [Table 1].

There was a trend toward smaller size in leiomyoma compared with GIST, but it did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.066) [Table 1]. All lesions were hypoechoic compared to submucosal layer and isoechoic compared to the muscularis propria layer. In 49/57 (86%) of all lesions, the layer of origin could be identified as proper muscular layer. The remaining 8/57 (14%) lesions were located extraintestinally (1/8, 13%) or in the small intestine (5/8, 50%), where layer association was difficult due to the low thickness of the bowel wall. Two out of eight lesions (38%) were located in the stomach, and the reasons for failing layer association could not be identified.


  Discussion Top


Our findings show that contrast-enhanced low mechanical index EUS displays avascular areas and hyperenhancement in a high percentage of GISTs. A small control group consisting of GI leiomyoma constantly displayed hypoenhancement, thus suggesting CE-EUS to be an appropriate method to distinguish both entities. No leiomyoma showed circumscribed avascular areas.

Another finding was the hard character (low strain) of GIST in real-time EUS-elastography. Nevertheless, also four of five leiomyomas displayed a hard elastographic pattern. Therefore, in contradiction to recently published data,[11] EUS elastography might not be helpful for differential diagnosis of GIST from GI leiomyoma.

GIST represents the largest group of mesenchymal tumors of the GI tract. The most common locations of GIST are stomach (60%), small bowel (30%) and duodenum (5%).[12],[13] The relative risk of malignant behavior of a GIST primarily depends on the number of mitoses per 50 high-power fields, on its size, on certain types of mutation, and on the location within the GI tract.[14],[15] Nevertheless, GIST tumors have an indeterminate malignant potential and current diagnosis cannot rely on imaging alone.[16]

Current GIST guidelines recommend surgical resection when lesions are larger than 20 or 30 mm.[17],[18],[19] Resection can be problematic when patient's situation or tumor localization makes wedge resection or similar techniques problematic.[2] However, smaller tumors (<20–30 mm) can be safely considered for endoscopic resection, with or without laparoscopic control.[20],[21] Consequently, NCCN guidelines recommend follow-up only in tumors <20 mm without high-risk EUS features while the rest should be resected.[22]

The most common imaging method is computed tomography (CT).[23] About 50% of all GISTs show cystic/necrotic areas in CECT examinations.[24] Ulceration, heterogeneous enhancement, lack of annular growth and lymphadenopathy, and demonstration of a supplying artery as well as draining veins are predictive for GISTs.[2],[12] In SETs, EUS is the most accurate method to predict the layer of origin and to evaluate structural features.[25],[26] However, differential diagnosis is challenging.[4],[5],[20],[27],[28],[29],[31] The yield of endoscopic techniques for tissue diagnosis is limited.[26],[32] In prospective studies, a definite diagnosis was possible only in 34%–88% of cases using EUS-guided tissue acquisition.[33],[34],[35],[36],[37],[38]

Since a few years, CEUS is now available for EUS techniques.[7],[8],[39],[40],[41] Preliminary data suggested that CE-EUS can discriminate GIST (hypervascular in all cases) from benign lesions.[42] Moreover, CE-EUS has been used to predict malignant behavior of GISTs.[43],[44],[45] EUS is further recommended in most of the guidelines for upper GI tract tumors.[46] For gastric stromal tumors, EUS easily demonstrates the submucosal origin of the lesion.[25] EUS has a high accuracy (99%) for localization, characterization of the lesion as GI mesenchymal tumors (83%) and for differentiating benign from malignant tumors (80%).[47]

Review of the literature

One study assessing the vascularity of GIST using CE-EUS showed that all 16 high-risk tumors had irregular vessels, whereas only 5 of 13 low-risk GISTs showed this feature. All tumors with homogeneous enhancement were low-risk GIST or benign spindle cell neoplasias (leiomyoma, Schwannoma). Seven high-risk GISTs displayed avascular areas on CE-EUS, whereas none of the low-risk tumors were found to have this feature. Interestingly, in one study, the sensitivity of CE-EUS for detecting intratumoral vessels (100%) was significantly higher than that for contrast-enhanced multidetector CT (31%) and for power Doppler-EUS (63%).[43]


  Conclusion Top


Our data confirm preliminary evidence [42] that CE-EUS is an accurate technique for discrimination of GIST and benign GI mesenchymal tumors, in particular GI leiomyoma. Hypervascularity and the presence of avascular areas are highly predictive criteria of GIST as compared to GI leiomyoma and may be used in addition to B-mode features in the differential diagnosis of GI SET. Due to the fact that both types of GI mesenchymal tumors are relatively hard lesions, EUS elastography is not useful for differentiation of GIST and GI leiomyoma. However, we did not use quantification techniques in EUS elastography (strain ratio or histogram analysis), which might have the potential to better discriminate between various degrees of stiffness of GI SET. Further limitations of our study were its retrospective design and the small control group including only five GI leiomyomas.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
  References Top

1.
Jenssen C, Barreiros AP, Will U, et al. German survey on EUS-Guided diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) – Evidence or “Gut-Feeling”? Ultraschall Med 2015;36:494-500.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Choi YR, Kim SH, Kim SA, et al. Differentiation of large (>/= 5 cm) gastrointestinal stromal tumors from benign subepithelial tumors in the stomach: Radiologists' performance using CT. Eur J Radiol 2014;83:250-60.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Seo SW, Hong SJ, Han JP, et al. Accuracy of a scoring system for the differential diagnosis of common gastric subepithelial tumors based on endoscopic ultrasonography. J Dig Dis 2013;14:647-53.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Kim GH, Kim KB, Lee SH, et al. Digital image analysis of endoscopic ultrasonography is helpful in diagnosing gastric mesenchymal tumors. BMC Gastroenterol 2014;14:7.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Kim GH, Park DY, Kim S, et al. Is it possible to differentiate gastric GISTs from gastric leiomyomas by EUS? World J Gastroenterol 2009;15:3376-81.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Piscaglia F, Nolsøe C, Dietrich CF, et al. The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical practice of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): Update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. Ultraschall Med 2012;33:33-59.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Dietrich CF, Ignee A, Frey H. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound with low mechanical index: A new technique. Z Gastroenterol 2005;43:1219-23.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Saftoiu A, Vilmann P, Dietrich CF, et al. Quantitative contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS in differential diagnosis of focal pancreatic masses (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2015;82:59-69.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Dietrich CF, Saftoiu A, Jenssen C. Real time elastography endoscopic ultrasound (RTE-EUS), a comprehensive review. Eur J Radiol 2014;83:405-14.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Cosgrove D, Piscaglia F, Bamber J, et al. EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical use of ultrasound elastography. Part 2: Clinical applications. Ultraschall Med 2013;34:238-53.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Tsuji Y, Kusano C, Gotoda T, et al. Diagnostic potential of endoscopic ultrasonography-elastography for gastric submucosal tumors: A pilot study. Dig Endosc 2016;28:173-8.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Cai PQ, Lv XF, Tian L, et al. CT characterization of duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015;204:988-93.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Miettinen M, Lasota J. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors: Review on morphology, molecular pathology, prognosis, and differential diagnosis. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2006;130:1466-78.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Dematteo RP, Gold JS, Saran L, et al. Tumor mitotic rate, size, and location independently predict recurrence after resection of primary gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). Cancer 2008;112:608-15.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Joensuu H. Risk stratification of patients diagnosed with gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Hum Pathol 2008;39:1411-9.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Saftoiu A. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy for the molecular diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors: Shifting treatment options. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2008;17:131-3.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Blay JY, Bonvalot S, Casali P, et al. Consensus meeting for the management of gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Report of the GIST Consensus Conference of 20-21 March, 2004, under the auspices of ESMO. Ann Oncol 2005;16:566-78.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Nishida T, Hirota S, Yanagisawa A, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) in Japan: English version. Int J Clin Oncol 2008;13:416-30.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
American Gastroenterological Association Institute. American Gastroenterological Association Institute medical position statement on the management of gastric subepithelial masses. Gastroenterology 2006;130:2215-6.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Kim HH. Endoscopic treatment for gastrointestinal stromal tumor: Advantages and hurdles. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2015;7:192-205.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Mino JS, Guerron AD, Monteiro R, et al. Long-term outcomes of combined endoscopic/laparoscopic intragastric enucleation of presumed gastric stromal tumors. Surg Endosc 2016;30:1747-53.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
von Mehren M, Randall RL, Benjamin RS, et al. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors, version 2.2014. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2014;12:853-62.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Barrios CH, Blackstein ME, Blay JY, et al. The GOLD ReGISTry: A global, prospective, observational registry collecting longitudinal data on patients with advanced and localised gastrointestinal stromal tumours. Eur J Cancer 2015;51:2423-33.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Baheti AD, Shinagare AB, O'Neill AC, et al. MDCT and clinicopathological features of small bowel gastrointestinal stromal tumours in 102 patients: A single institute experience. Br J Radiol 2015;88:20150085.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Jenssen C, Dietrich CF. Endoscopic ultrasound of gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Ultraschall Med 2008;29:236-56.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Eckardt AJ, Jenssen C. Current endoscopic ultrasound-guided approach to incidental subepithelial lesions: Optimal or optional? Ann Gastroenterol 2015;28:160-172.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Onishi M, Tominaga K, Sugimori S, et al. Internal hypoechoic feature by EUS as a possible predictive marker for the enlargement potential of gastric GI stromal tumors. Gastrointest Endosc 2012;75:731-8.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Palazzo L, Landi B, Cellier C, et al. Endosonographic features predictive of benign and malignant gastrointestinal stromal cell tumours. Gut 2000;46:88-92.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Shah P, Gao F, Edmundowicz SA, et al. Predicting malignant potential of gastrointestinal stromal tumors using endoscopic ultrasound. Dig Dis Sci 2009;54:1265-9.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Jeon SW, Park YD, Chung YJ, et al. Gastrointestinal stromal tumors of the stomach: Endosonographic differentiation in relation to histological risk. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007;22:2069-75.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Chen TH, Hsu CM, Chu YY, et al. Association of endoscopic ultrasonographic parameters and gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs): Can endoscopic ultrasonography be used to screen gastric GISTs for potential malignancy? Scand J Gastroenterol 2016;51:374-7.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Jenssen C, Hocke M, Fusaroli P, et al. EFSUMB Guidelines on Interventional Ultrasound (INVUS), Part IV – EUS-guided Interventions: General aspects and EUS-guided sampling (Long Version). Ultraschall Med 2016;37:E33-76.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Eckardt AJ, Adler A, Gomes EM, et al. Endosonographic large-bore biopsy of gastric subepithelial tumors: A prospective multicenter study. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012;24:1135-44.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Polkowski M, Gerke W, Jarosz D, et al. Diagnostic yield and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided trucut [corrected] biopsy in patients with gastric submucosal tumors: A prospective study. Endoscopy 2009;41:329-34.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Akahoshi K, Sumida Y, Matsui N, et al. Preoperative diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumor by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration. World J Gastroenterol 2007;13:2077-82.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Philipper M, Hollerbach S, Gabbert HE, et al. Prospective comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and surgical histology in upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors. Endoscopy 2010;42:300-5.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Larghi A, Fuccio L, Chiarello G, et al. Fine-needle tissue acquisition from subepithelial lesions using a forward-viewing linear echoendoscope. Endoscopy 2014;46:39-45.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
Fernández-Esparrach G, Sendino O, Solé M, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and trucut biopsy in the diagnosis of gastric stromal tumors: A randomized crossover study. Endoscopy 2010;42:292-9.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
Dietrich C, Hartung E, Ignee A. The use of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in patients with GIST metastases that are negative in CT and PET. Ultraschall Med 2008;29 Suppl 5:276-7.  Back to cited text no. 39
    
40.
Dietrich CF, Ignee A, Braden B, et al. Improved differentiation of pancreatic tumors using contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008;6:590-597.e1.  Back to cited text no. 40
    
41.
Dietrich CF, Jenssen C, Hocke M, et al. Imaging of gastrointestinal stromal tumours with modern ultrasound techniques – A pictorial essay. Z Gastroenterol 2012;50:457-67.  Back to cited text no. 41
    
42.
Kannengiesser K, Mahlke R, Petersen F, et al. Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound is able to discriminate benign submucosal lesions from gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Scand J Gastroenterol 2012;47:1515-20.  Back to cited text no. 42
    
43.
Sakamoto H, Kitano M, Matsui S, et al. Estimation of malignant potential of GI stromal tumors by contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2011;73:227-37.  Back to cited text no. 43
    
44.
Yamashita Y, Kato J, Ueda K, et al. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasonography can predict a higher malignant potential of gastrointestinal stromal tumors by visualizing large newly formed vessels. J Clin Ultrasound 2015;43:89-97.  Back to cited text no. 44
    
45.
Zhao Y, Qian L, Li P, et al. The diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasonography and contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography in gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Endosc Ultrasound 2016;5:111-7.  Back to cited text no. 45
    
46.
Grenacher L, Schwarz M, Lordick F, et al. S3 guideline – Diagnosis and treatment of gastric carcinoma: Relevance for radiologic imaging. Rofo 2012;184:706-12.  Back to cited text no. 46
    
47.
Ji F, Wang ZW, Wang LJ, et al. Clinicopathological characteristics of gastrointestinal mesenchymal tumors and diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasonography. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008;23 (8 Pt 2):E318-24.  Back to cited text no. 47
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1]


This article has been cited by
1 Reliability of Endoscopic Ultrasound Using Miniprobes and Grayscale Histogram Analysis in Diagnosing Upper Gastrointestinal Subepithelial Lesions
Samiullah Khan,Rui Zhang,Weili Fang,Tao Wang,Shu Li,Danna Wang,Yixiang Chang,Lanping Zhu,Bang-mao Wang,Wentian Liu
Gastroenterology Research and Practice. 2020; 2020: 1
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Do we need elastography for EUS?
ChristophF Dietrich,Sean Burmeister,Stephan Hollerbach,PaoloGiorgio Arcidiacono,Barbara Braden,Pietro Fusaroli,Michael Hocke,Julio Iglesias-Garcia,Masayuki Kitano,Alberto Larghi,Bertrand Napoleon,KofiW Oppong,Mihai Rimbas,Adrian Saftoiu,AnandV Sahai,Siyu Sun,Yi Dong,Silvia Carrara,JooHa Hwang,Christian Jenssen
Endoscopic Ultrasound. 2020; 0(0): 0
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 Do we need contrast agents for EUS?
Adrian Saftoiu,Bertrand Napoleon,PaoloGiorgio Arcidiacono,Barbara Braden,Sean Burmeister,Silvia Carrara,XinWu Cui,Pietro Fusaroli,Uwe Gottschalk,Michael Hocke,Stephan Hollerbach,Julio Iglesias-Garcia,Christian Jenssen,Masayuki Kitano,Alberto Larghi,KofiW Oppong,AnandV Sahai,Siyu Sun,Eike Burmester,Milena Di Leo,MariaChiara Petrone,Erwin Santos,AnthonyY. B. Teoh,JooHa Hwang,Mihai Rimbas,Malay Sharma,Rajesh Puri,Michel Kahaleh,ChristophF Dietrich
Endoscopic Ultrasound. 2020; 0(0): 0
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 Diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography in predicting the malignancy potential of submucosal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Yong-tao Yang,Neng Shen,Fei Ao,Wei-qing Chen
Surgical Endoscopy. 2020;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
5 Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Endosonografie subepithelialer Tumoren
Stephan Hollerbach
Gastro-News. 2020; 7(1): 42
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
6 The relationship between the interruption of the lower esophageal sphincter and relief of dysphagia after per-oral endoscopic myotomy for achalasia
Sheng Wang,Xiang Liu,Nan Ge,Guoxin Wang,Jintao Guo,Wen Liu,Jinlong Hu,Siyu Sun
Endoscopic Ultrasound. 2020; 0(0): 0
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
7 Knöpfologie in der B-Bild-Sonografie
Christoph F. Dietrich,Leonie Bartsch,Verena Turco,Eckhart Fröhlich,Michael Hocke,Christian Jenssen,Reinhard Kubale,Dagmar Schreiber-Dietrich,Heiko Dudwiesus,André Ignee
Onkologie up2date. 2020; 2(03): 187
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
8 Contrast Enhanced EUS Imaging for Gastrointestinal Subepithelial Tumors
Takashi Tamura,Masayuki Kitano
Clinical Endoscopy. 2019; 52(4): 306
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
9 What should be known prior to performing EUS exams? (Part II)
ChristophF Dietrich,PaoloGiorgio Arcidiacono,Barbara Braden,Sean Burmeister,Silvia Carrara,Xinwu Cui,MilenaDi Leo,Yi Dong,Pietro Fusaroli,Uwe Gottschalk,AndrewJ Healey,Michael Hocke,Stephan Hollerbach,JulioIglesias Garcia,André Ignee,Christian Jürgensen,Michel Kahaleh,Masayuki Kitano,Rastislav Kunda,Alberto Larghi,Kathleen Möller,Bertrand Napoleon,KofiW Oppong,MariaChiara Petrone,Adrian Saftoiu,Rajesh Puri,AnandV Sahai,Erwin Santo,Malay Sharma,Assaad Soweid,Siyu Sun,AnthonyYuen Bun Teoh,Peter Vilmann,Hans Seifert,Christian Jenssen
Endoscopic Ultrasound. 2019; 0(0): 0
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
10 Endoscopic full-thickness resection for treating small tumors originating from the muscularis propria in the gastric fundus: An improvement in technique over 15 years
Nan Ge,Jin-Long Hu,Fei Yang,Fan Yang,Si-Yu Sun
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. 2019; 11(11): 1054
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
11 Endoscopic ultrasonography and small-bowel endoscopy: Present and future
Gian Eugenio Tontini,Guido Manfredi,Stefania Orlando,Helmut Neumann,Maurizio Vecchi,Elisabetta Buscarini,Luca Elli
Digestive Endoscopy. 2019;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
12 Endoscopic Removal of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors in the Stomach: A Single-Center Experience
Yingjie Guo,Xue Jing,Jian Zhang,Xueli Ding,Xiaoyu Li,Tao Mao,Zibin Tian
Gastroenterology Research and Practice. 2019; 2019: 1
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
13 Value of contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography in differentiating between gastrointestinal stromal tumors: A meta-analysis
Jia Yue Tang,Ke Gong Tao,Li Yuan Zhang,Kai Ming Wu,Jian Shi,Xin Zeng,Yong Lin
Journal of Digestive Diseases. 2019; 20(3): 127
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
14 Utility of EUS elastography in the diagnosis of gastric subepithelial tumors: a pilot study (with video)
Sun Hwa Kim,In Kyung Yoo,Chang-Il Kwon,Sung Pyo Hong,Joo Young Cho
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2019;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
15 Stomach wall structure and vessels imaging by acoustic resolution photoacoustic microscopy
Cheng Wang,Yu-Fei Lu,Chun-Miao Cai,Hua-Zhong Xiang,Gang Zheng
World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2018; 24(31): 3531
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
16 Clinical and prognostic significance of Raf kinase inhibitory protein expression in gastrointestinal stromal tumors
Yang Wang,Juan-Juan Chen,Xiao-Fei Wang,Qiang Wang
World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2018; 24(23): 2508
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
17 Contrast Enhanced Harmonic Endoscopic Ultrasound: A Novel Approach for Diagnosis and Management of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors
Ankit Chhoda,Deepanshu Jain,Venkateswar R Surabhi,Shashideep Singhal
Clinical Endoscopy. 2018; 51(3): 215
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
18 Present status and perspectives of endosonography 2017 in gastroenterology
Michael Hocke,Barbara Braden,Christian Jenssen,Christoph F. Dietrich
The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine. 2018; 33(1): 36
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
19 Evaluation of Gastric Emptying by Transabdominal Ultrasound after Oral Administration of Semisolid Cellulose-Based Gastric Ultrasound Contrast Agents
Zhijun Liu,Zhining Liu,Yuhong Li,Jintao Guo,Jianmin Li,Weidong Ren,Shaoshan Tang,Limei Xie,Ying Huang,Liping Huang,Siyu Sun,Ying Zhao
Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. 2018;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
20 New Imaging Techniques: Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Elastography
Julio Iglesias-García,Jose Lariño-Noia,Juan Enrique Domínguez-Muñoz
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America. 2017;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
21 Non-invasive evaluation of intestinal disorders: The role of elastographic techniques
Federica Branchi,Flavio Caprioli,Stefania Orlando,Dario Conte,Mirella Fraquelli
World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2017; 23(16): 2832
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
22 Future Directions for Endoscopic Ultrasound
Sahin Coban,Omer Basar,William R. Brugge
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America. 2017; 27(4): 759
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
   Abstract
  Introduction
   Materials and Me...
  Results
  Discussion
  Conclusion
   References
   Article Figures
   Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2525    
    Printed49    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded555    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 22    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]