Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Pediatric contrast-enhanced ultrasound: optimization of techniques and dosing

  • Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in children
  • Published:
Pediatric Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

When performing contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), ultrasound (US) scanner settings, examination technique, and contrast agent dose and administration must be optimized to ensure that high-quality, diagnostic and reproducible images are acquired for qualitative and quantitative interpretations. When carrying out CEUS in children, examination settings should be tailored to their body size and specific indications, similar to B-mode US. This review article details the basic background knowledge that is needed to perform CEUS optimally in children, including considerations related to US scanner settings and US contrast agent dose selection and administration techniques.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Greis C (2009) Ultrasound contrast agents as markers of vascularity and microcirculation. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 43:1–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Correas JM, Bridal L, Lesavre A et al (2001) Ultrasound contrast agents: properties, principles of action, tolerance, and artifacts. Eur Radiol 11:1316–1328

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Burns PN, Wilson SR (2006) Microbubble contrast for radiological imaging: 1. Principles. Ultrasound Q 22:5–13

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wilson SR, Burns PN (2006) Microbubble contrast for radiological imaging: 2. Applications. Ultrasound Q 22:15–18

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kessner R, Nakamoto DA, Kondray V et al (2019) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound guidance for interventional procedures. J Ultrasound Med 38:2541–2557

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yusuf GT, Fang C, Huang DY et al (2018) Endocavitary contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): a novel problem solving technique. Insights Imaging 9:303–311

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Huang DY, Yusuf GT, Daneshi M et al (2018) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in abdominal intervention. Abdom Radiol 43:960–976

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bracco Diagnostics (2019) Lumason: highlights of prescribing information. https://imaging.bracco.com/sites/braccoimaging.com/files/technica_sheet_pdf/us-en-2020-01-15-spc-lumason.pdf. Accessed 26 July 2020

  9. GE Healthcare (2016) Optison: highlights of prescribing information. http://www3.gehealthcare.com/~/media/documents/MarketoPDFsnogating/OPT-1H-OSLO_Optison_BK. Accessed 26 July 2020

  10. Lantheus Medical Imaging (2001) Definity: highlights of prescribing information. https://www.lantheus.com//assets/Definity-PI-8.5x11_mktg-515987-0318.pdf. Accessed 26 July 2020

  11. Bracco International (2001) SonoVue: summary of product characteristics. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/sonovue-epar-product-information_en.pdf. Accessed 26 July 2020

  12. Dietrich CF, Averkiou M, Nielsen MB et al (2018) How to perform contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Ultrasound Int Open 4:E2–E15

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Greis C (2014) Technical aspects of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) examinations: tips and tricks. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 58:89–95

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Quaia E (2007) Contrast-specific ultrasound techniques. Radiol Med 112:473–490

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Azmin M, Harfield C, Ahmad Z et al (2012) How do microbubbles and ultrasound interact? Basic physical, dynamic and engineering principles. Curr Pharm Des 18:2118–2134

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sen T, Tufekcioglu O, Koza Y (2015) Mechanical index. Anatol J Cardiol 15:334–336

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Nelson TR, Fowlkes JB, Abramowicz JS et al (2009) Ultrasound biosafety considerations for the practicing sonographer and sonologist. J Ultrasound Med 28:139–150

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (2020) AIUM practice parameter for the performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound examinations. J Ultrasound Med 39(3):421–429. https://doi.org/10.1002/jum.15204

  19. Fetzer DT, Rafailidis V, Peterson C et al (2018) Artifacts in contrast-enhanced ultrasound: a pictorial essay. Abdom Radiol 43:977–997

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Postema M, Schmitz G (2005) Ultrasonic fragmentation of microbubbles: a theoretical approach of the flash in flash-echo. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 4:4023–4026

    Google Scholar 

  21. Averkiou MA, Bruce MF, Powers JE et al (2020) Imaging methods for ultrasound contrast agents. Ultrasound Med Biol 46:498–517

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Dietrich CF, Ignee A, Hocke M et al (2011) Pitfalls and artefacts using contrast enhanced ultrasound. Z Gastroenterol 49:350–356

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Averkiou M, Lampaskis M, Kyriakopoulou K et al (2010) Quantification of tumor microvascularity with respiratory gated contrast enhanced ultrasound for monitoring therapy. Ultrasound Med Biol 36:68–77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lassau N, Chapotot L, Benatsou B et al (2012) Standardization of dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the evaluation of antiangiogenic therapies: the French multicenter support for innovative and expensive techniques study. Investig Radiol 47:711–716

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. McDicken WN, Anderson T (2011) Chapter 1: basic physics of medical ultrasound. In: Allan PLP, Baxter GM, Weston M (eds) Clinical ultrasound, 3rd edn. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, pp 3–15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Ng AW, Swanevelder J (2011) Resolution in ultrasound imaging. Continuing Educ Anaesth Crit Care Pain 11:186–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Piscaglia F, Nolsoe C, Dietrich CF et al (2012) The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical practice of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. Ultraschall Med 33:33–59

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Helfield B (2019) A review of phospholipid encapsulated ultrasound contrast agent microbubble physics. Ultrasound Med Biol 45:282–300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kramer MR, Bhagat N, Back SJ et al (2018) Influence of contrast-enhanced ultrasound administration setups on microbubble enhancement: a focus on pediatric applications. Pediatr Radiol 48:101–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Barr RG (2017) How to develop a contrast-enhanced ultrasound program. J Ultrasound Med 36:1225–1240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Eisenbrey JR, Daecher A, Kramer MR et al (2015) Effects of needle and catheter size on commercially available ultrasound contrast agents. J Ultrasound Med 34:1961–1968

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Talu E, Powell RL, Longo ML et al (2008) Needle size and injection rate impact microbubble contrast agent population. Ultrasound Med Biol 34:1182–1185

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Greis C (2011) Quantitative evaluation of microvascular blood flow by contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 49:137–149

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Tranquart F, Mercier L, Frinking P et al (2012) Perfusion quantification in contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) — ready for research projects and routine clinical use. Ultraschall Med 33:S31–S38

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kljucevsek D, Riccabona M, Ording Muller LS et al (2020) Intracavitary contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in children: review with procedural recommendations and clinical applications from the European Society of Paediatric Radiology abdominal imaging task force. Pediatr Radiol 50:596–606

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Darge K (2008) Voiding urosonography with ultrasound contrast agents for the diagnosis of vesicoureteric reflux in children. I. Procedure. Pediatr Radiol 38:40–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ntoulia A, Back SJ, Shellikeri S et al (2018) Contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography (ceVUS) with the intravesical administration of the ultrasound contrast agent Optison for vesicoureteral reflux detection in children: a prospective clinical trial. Pediatr Radiol 48:216–226

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. McCarville MB, Kaste SC, Hoffer FA et al (2012) Contrast-enhanced sonography of malignant pediatric abdominal and pelvic solid tumors: preliminary safety and feasibility data. Pediatr Radiol 42:824–833

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Armstrong LB, Mooney DP, Paltiel H et al (2018) Contrast enhanced ultrasound for the evaluation of blunt pediatric abdominal trauma. J Pediatr Surg 53:548–552

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Coleman JL, Navid F, Furman WL et al (2014) Safety of ultrasound contrast agents in the pediatric oncologic population: a single-institution experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202:966–970

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. McCarville MB, Coleman JL, Guo J et al (2016) Use of quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound to assess response to antiangiogenic therapy in children and adolescents with solid malignancies: a pilot study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 206:933–939

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. McMahon CJ, Ayres NA, Bezold LI et al (2005) Safety and efficacy of intravenous contrast imaging in pediatric echocardiography. Pediatr Cardiol 26:413–417

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Bhayana D, Kim TK, Jang HJ et al (2010) Hypervascular liver masses on contrast-enhanced ultrasound: the importance of washout. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:977–983

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Heppner P, Ellegala DB, Durieux M et al (2006) Contrast ultrasonographic assessment of cerebral perfusion in patients undergoing decompressive craniectomy for traumatic brain injury. J Neurosurg 104:738–745

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Lanka B, Jang HJ, Kim TK et al (2007) Impact of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in a tertiary clinical practice. J Ultrasound Med 26:1703–1714

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Ascenti G, Zimbaro G, Mazziotti S et al (2004) Harmonic US imaging of vesicoureteric reflux in children: usefulness of a second generation US contrast agent. Pediatr Radiol 34:481–487

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Duran C, del Riego J, Riera L et al (2012) Voiding urosonography including urethrosonography: high-quality examinations with an optimised procedure using a second-generation US contrast agent. Pediatr Radiol 42:660–667

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Faizah MZ, Hamzaini AH, Kanaheswari Y et al (2015) Contrast enhanced voiding urosonography (ce-VUS) as a radiation-free technique in the diagnosis of vesicoureteric reflux: our early experience. Med J Malaysia 70:269–272

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Kis E, Nyitrai A, Varkonyi I et al (2010) Voiding urosonography with second-generation contrast agent versus voiding cystourethrography. Pediatr Nephrol 25:2289–2293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Kljucevsek D, Battelino N, Tomazic M et al (2012) A comparison of echo-enhanced voiding urosonography with X-ray voiding cystourethrography in the first year of life. Acta Paediatr 101:e235–e239

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Papadopoulou F, Anthopoulou A, Siomou E et al (2009) Harmonic voiding urosonography with a second-generation contrast agent for the diagnosis of vesicoureteral reflux. Pediatr Radiol 39:239–244

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Papadopoulou F, Ntoulia A, Siomou E et al (2014) Contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography with intravesical administration of a second-generation ultrasound contrast agent for diagnosis of vesicoureteral reflux: prospective evaluation of contrast safety in 1,010 children. Pediatr Radiol 44:719–728

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Wong LS, Tse KS, Fan TW et al (2014) Voiding urosonography with second-generation ultrasound contrast versus micturating cystourethrography in the diagnosis of vesicoureteric reflux. Eur J Pediatr 173:1095–1101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Babu R, Gopinath V, Sai V (2015) Voiding urosonography: contrast-enhanced ultrasound cystography to diagnose vesico-ureteric reflux: a pilot study. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg 20:40–41

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Wozniak MM, Osemlak P, Pawelec A et al (2014) Intraoperative contrast-enhanced urosonography during endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteral reflux in children. Pediatr Radiol 44:1093–1100

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Colleran GC, Barnewolt CE, Chow JS et al (2016) Intrarenal reflux: diagnosis at contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography. J Ultrasound Med 35:1811–1819

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Colleran GC, Paltiel HJ, Barnewolt CE et al (2016) Residual intravesical iodinated contrast: a potential cause of false-negative reflux study at contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography. Pediatr Radiol 46:1614–1617

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Riccabona M, Vivier PH, Ntoulia A et al (2014) ESPR uroradiology task force imaging recommendations in paediatric uroradiology, Part VII: standardised terminology, impact of existing recommendations, and update on contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the paediatric urogenital tract. Pediatr Radiol 44:1478–1484

  59. Chow JS, Paltiel HJ, Padua HM et al (2019) Contrast-enhanced colosonography for the evaluation of children with an imperforate anus. J Ultrasound Med 38:2777–2783

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Seranio N, Darge K, Canning DA et al (2018) Contrast enhanced genitosonography (CEGS) of urogenital sinus: a case of improved conspicuity with image inversion. Radiol Case Rep 13:652–654

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Robrecht J, Darge K (2007) In-vitro comparison of a 1st- and a 2nd-generation US contrast agent for reflux diagnosis. Rofo 179:818–825

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Tang MX, Mulvana H, Gauthier T et al (2011) Quantitative contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging: a review of sources of variability. Interface Focus 1:520–539

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Kutty S, Xiao Y, Olson J et al (2016) Safety and efficacy of cardiac ultrasound contrast in children and adolescents for resting and stress echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 29:655–662

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Duran C, Beltran VP, Gonzalez A et al (2017) Contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography for vesicoureteral reflux diagnosis in children. Radiographics 37:1854–1869

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, 3401 Civic Center Blvd., Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Misun Hwang, Susan J. Back, Ryne A. Didier, Trudy A. Morgan, Laura Poznick & Anush Sridharan

  2. Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Misun Hwang, Susan J. Back & Ryne A. Didier

  3. Children’s Hospital, Dresden Municipal Hospital, Teaching-Hospital of Technical University, Dresden, Germany

    Norbert Lorenz

  4. Trainings-Zentrum Ultraschall-Diagnostik LS GmbH, Mainleus, Germany

    Ludwig Steffgen

Authors
  1. Misun Hwang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susan J. Back
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ryne A. Didier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Norbert Lorenz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Trudy A. Morgan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Laura Poznick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ludwig Steffgen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Anush Sridharan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Misun Hwang.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hwang, M., Back, S.J., Didier, R.A. et al. Pediatric contrast-enhanced ultrasound: optimization of techniques and dosing. Pediatr Radiol 51, 2147–2160 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-020-04812-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-020-04812-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation