The Role of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in Guiding Radiofrequency Ablation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of the study was to determine the efficacy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) using ultrasound (US)-specific microbubbles in guiding radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 50 patients with HCC treated with CEUS guided RFA using perflutren at our institution was performed. CEUS images were first compared to B-mode US images performed at the same RFA session to determine the ability of CEUS to increase the conspicuity of lesions. A qualitative score (1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = excellent) was used to grade the ability to visualize the lesions. The preprocedure CEUS images were then evaluated using the most recent prior contrast enhanced computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The efficacy of the treatment was evaluated with short-term follow-up imaging (median 1 month) for presence of residual or recurrent disease. RESULTS: CEUS allows at least fair visualization (score ≥2) in 78% (reader 1) and 80% (reader 2) of the lesions not visualized by B-mode US, and 50% (reader 1) and 42% (reader 2) of the lesions poorly visualized by B-mode US. Lesion appearances on CEUS are largely concordant with those on CT or MRI: 88% for reader 1, 96% for reader 2. With CEUS-guided RFA, complete response was achieved in the vast majority of the lesions at short-term follow-up: 82% for reader 1, 94% for reader 2. CONCLUSIONS: CEUS increases the conspicuity and provides better characterization of hypervascular HCC that are either not seen or poorly seen on B-mode US, and CEUS provides real-time guidance of RFA with good short-term treatment responses.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".