Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

General Aspects of the Use of Contrast Agents in Diagnostic Ultrasound. History and Current State of the Technology. Review of Contrast Agents

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound

  • 537 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter analyzes literature data and covers main steps of evolution of ultrasound diagnosis with the use of various contrast agents. Contrast agents differ in composition, administration means, and interaction with the body. Their features determine corresponding application ways and examination types. The place of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in medical practice is discussed in depth. Individual ultrasound contrast agents are thoroughly described with special attention to advantages and disadvantages for routine diagnosis.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Gramiak R, Shah PM. Echocardiography of the aortic root. Investig Radiol. 1968;3(5):356–66. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004424-196809000-00011.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Shah PM. Contrast echocardiography - a historical perspective. In: Nanda NC, Schlief R, editors. Advances in echo imaging using contrast enhancement. Dordrecht: Springer; 1993. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8126-4_1.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Lencioni R. Enhancing the role of ultrasound with contrast agents. Springer; 2006.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Chiang CW, Lin FC, Fu M, Fang BR, Hsu TS, Lee YS. Importance of adequate gas-mixing in contrast echocardiography. Chest. 1986;89(5):723–6. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.89.5.723.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cosgrove D, Eckersley R. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: basic physics and technology overview. In: Lencioni R, editor. Enhancing the role of ultrasound with contrast agents. Milano: Springer; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Leopold GR, Asher WM. Deleterious effects of gastrointestinal contrast material on abdominal echography. Radiology. 1971;98(3):637–40. https://doi.org/10.1148/98.3.637.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mattrey RF, Leopold GR, vanSonnenberg E, Gosink BB, Scheible FW, Long DM. Perfluorochemicals as liver- and spleen-seeking ultrasound contrast agents. J Ultrasound Med. 1983;2(4):173–6. https://doi.org/10.7863/jum.1983.2.4.173.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ophir J, Parker KJ. Contrast agents in diagnostic ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1990;16(2):209. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-5629(90)90151-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Tuthill TA, Baggs RB, Violante MR, Parker KJ. Ultrasound properties of liver with and without particulate contrast agents. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1991;17(3):231–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-5629(91)90044-w.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rovai D, Lombardi M, Distante A, L’Abbate A. Myocardial perfusion by contrast echocardiography. From off-line processing to radio frequency analysis. Circulation. 1991;83(5 Suppl):III97–III103.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Weskott HP. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound. 2nd ed. London: Uni-Med Science; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Feinstein SB, Shah PM, Bing RJ, Meerbaum S, Corday E, Chang BL, et al. Microbubble dynamics visualized in the intact capillary circulation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1984;4(3):595–600. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0735-1097(84)80107-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. De Castro S, Agati L, Cartoni D. Harmonic imaging with Levovist for transthoracic echocardiographic reconstruction of left ventricle in patients with post-ischemic left ventricular dysfunction and suboptimal acoustic windows. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2000;13(2):139–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Drelich-Zbroja A, Jargiełło T, Szymańska A, Krzyzanowski W, Szczerbo-Trojanowska M. Can Levovist-enhanced Doppler ultrasound replace angiography in renal arteries imaging? Med Sci Monit. 2004;10(3):36–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ernst H, Hahn EG, Balzer T, et al. Color Doppler ultrasound of liver lesion signal enhancement after intravenous injection of the ultrasound contrast agent Levovist. J Clin Ultrasound. 1996;24(1):31–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Frauscher F, Klauser A, Halpern EJ, Horninger W, Bartsch G. Detection of prostate cancer with a microbubble ultrasound contrast agent. Lancet. 2001;357(9271):1849–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(00)04970-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kahl A, Venz S, Keske U, Bechstein WO, Berweck S, Felix R, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and Levovist-enhanced color and power Doppler imaging in the follow-up of pancreas transplants in patients after combined pancreas and kidney transplantation. Transplant Proc. 1998;30(2):246–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0041-1345(97)01244-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kedar RP, Cosgrove D, McCready VR, Bamber JC, Carter ER. Microbubble contrast agent for color Doppler US: effect on breast masses. Work Progr Radiol. 1996;198(3):679–86. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.198.3.8628854.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Kratzer W, Reuter S, Hirschbuehl K, Ehrhardt AR, Mason RA, Haenle MM, et al. Comparison of contrast-enhanced power Doppler ultrasound (Levovist) and computed tomography in alveolar echinococcosis. Abdom Imaging. 2005;30(3):286–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-004-0263-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sidhu PS, Marshall MM, Ryan SM, Ellis SM. Clinical use of Levovist, an ultrasound contrast agent, in the imaging of liver transplantation: assessment of the pre- and post-transplant patient. Eur Radiol. 2000;10(7):1114–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003309900117.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Spiezia S, Farina R, Cerbone G. Analysis of color Doppler signal intensity variation after levovist injection: a new approach to the diagnosis of thyroid nodules. J Ultrasound Med. 2001;20(3):223–31.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Stuhrmann M, Schwarz T, Schietzel M. Mammakarzinom-Rezidiv versus postoperative Narbe. Sonographische Differenzierung unter Einsatz des Ultraschall-Kontrastmittels Levovist [Breast cancer recurrence versus scar. Ultrasonographic differentiation using Levovist as the contrast medium]. Ultraschall Med. 2001;22(1):2–6. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2001-11245.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sviridov NK, Napolov IK. Klinicheskoe primenenie ul’trazvukovogo kontrastnogo sredstva levovista dlia vizualizatsii transplantata pecheni [Clinical use of the ultrasound contrast Levovist for hepatic graft visualization]. Vestn Rentgenol Radiol. 2003;(1):61–2.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Gazhonova VE, Zubarev AV, Kislyakova MV. Ekhokontrastnaya angiografiya predstatel’noj zhelezy s Levovistom dlya uluchsheniya vizualizacii krovotoka [Echocontrast angiography of the prostate with Levovist to improve the visualization of blood flow]. In: Sandrikov VA, editor. Diagnostika – novye metody [Diagnostics – new methods]. Moscow: Air-Art; 1998. p. 151–6. Russian.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Zubarev AV. 3-dementional and contrast-enhanced angiography. Meditsinskaya Vizualizatsiya. 1997;4:3–8. Russian.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kamalov YR, Sandrikov VA, Gavrilov AV. Ispol’zovanie ul’trazvukovogo kontrasta Levovist pri obsledovanii bol’nyh opuholyami pecheni, portal’noj gipertenziej i pri ortotopicheskoj transplantacii pecheni [The use of Levovist ultrasound contrast agent in the examination of patients with liver tumors, portal hypertension, and orthotopic liver transplantation]. In: Sandrikov VA, editor. Diagnostika – novye metody [Diagnostics – new methods]. Moscow: Air-Art; 1998. Russian.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Grayburn PA, Weiss JL, Hack TC, et al. Phase III multicenter trial comparing the efficacy of 2% dodecafluoropentane emulsion (EchoGen) and sonicated 5% human albumin (Albunex) as ultrasound contrast agents in patients with suboptimal echocardiograms. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32(1):230–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0735-1097(98)00219-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ragde H, Kenny GM, Murphy GP, Landin K. Transrectal ultrasound microbubble contrast angiography of the prostate. Prostate. 1997;32(4):279–83. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0045(19970901)32:4<279::aid-pros8>3.0.co;2-e.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Robbin ML, Eisenfeld AJ. Perflenapent emulsion: a US contrast agent for diagnostic radiology – multicenter, double-blind comparison with a placebo. EchoGen Contrst Ultrasound Study Group. Radiology. 1998;207(3):717–22. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.207.3.9609895.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Bernatik T, Becker D, Neureiter D, et al. Hepatic transit time of an echo enhancer: an indicator of metastatic spread to the liver. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004;16(3):313–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/00042737-200403000-00011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Clark LN, Dittrich HC. Cardiac imaging using Optison. Am J Cardiol. 2000;86(4A):14G–8G. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9149(00)00984-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Jung EM, Clevert DA, Rupp N. Erste Erfahrungen mit der kontrastmittelverstärkten Sonographie mit Optison bei der perkutanen Thermoablation von Lebertumoren [Contrast-enhanced ultrasound with Optison in percutaneous thermoablation of liver tumors]. Rofo. 2003;175(10):1403–12. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2003-42882.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Jung EM, Jungius KP, Rupp N, et al. Contrast enhanced harmonic ultrasound for differentiating breast tumors - first results. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2005;33(2):109–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sontum PC. Physicochemical characteristics of Sonazoid, a new contrast agent for ultrasound imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2008;34(5):824–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2007.11.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ignee A, Atkinson NS, Schuessler G, Dietrich CF. Ultrasound contrast agents. Endosc Ultrasound. 2016;5(6):355–62. https://doi.org/10.4103/2303-9027.193594.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Albrecht T, Blomley M, Bolondi L, et al. Guidelines for the use of contrast agents in ultrasound. Ultraschall Med. 2004;25:249–56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Dietrich CF, Nolsøe CP, Barr RG, Berzigotti A, Burns PN, Cantisani V, et al. Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the liver - update 2020 - WFUMB in cooperation with EFSUMB, AFSUMB, AIUM, and FLAUS. Ultraschall Med. 2020;41(5):562–85. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1177-0530.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. 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. 2011;32:1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Sidhu PS, Cantisani V, Dietrich CF, Gilja OH, Saftoiu A, Bartels E, et al. The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations for the clinical practice of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in non-hepatic applications: update 2017 (long version). Ultraschall Med. 2018;39(2):e2–e44. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0586-1107.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Summary of product characteristics. SonoVue 8 microlitres/ml powder and solvent for dispersion for injection. https://ec.europa.eu/health/documents/community-register/2015/20150619132105/anx_132105_en.pdf. Accessed 15 Feb 2021.

  41. Piscaglia F, Bolondi L. Italian Society for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (SIUMB) Study Group on Ultrasound Contrast Agents. The safety of SonoVue in abdominal applications: retrospective analysis of 23188 investigations. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2006;32:1369–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Hu C, Feng Y, Huang P, Jin J. Adverse reactions after the use of SonoVue contrast agent. Characteristics and nursing care experience. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98(44):e17745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Assessment report. SonoVue committee for medicinal products for human use (CHMP). 2 May 2014 EMA/454283/2014. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/variation-report/sonovue-h-c-303-ii-0025-epar-assessment-report-variation_en.pdf. Accessed 15 Feb 2021.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Visual and Functional Diagnostics, Federal State Budget Institution “National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology n.a. V.I.Kulakov”, Moscow, Russian Federation

    Alexander N. Sencha

  2. Department of Ultrasound Diagnostics of the Center for Radiological Diagnostics, Private Healthcare Institution, “Clinical Hospital “RZD-Medicina” of Yaroslavl City”, Yaroslavl, Russian Federation

    Ella I. Peniaeva

  3. Department of Ultrasound Diagnosis, Kazan State Medical Academy, Kazan, Russian Federation

    Munir G. Tukhbatullin

  4. Department of Ultrasound Diagnosis of the Postgraduate Education Division, Russian National Medical Research University n.a. N.I.Pirogov, Moscow, Russian Federation

    Elena A. Zubareva

  5. Department of Propaedeutics of Internal Diseases with Radiation Diagnostics Course, I. N. Ulianov Chuvash State University, Cheboksary, Chuvash Republic, Russian Federation

    Liubov A. Timofeyeva

  6. Department of Ultrasound Diagnostics of the Center for Radiological Diagnostics, Private Healthcare Institution “Clinical Hospital “RZD-Medicina” of Yaroslavl City”, Yaroslavl, Russian Federation

    Yury N. Patrunov

  7. Center for Photonics and Quantum Materials, Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, Moscow, Russian Federation

    Roman A. Barmin & Polina G. Rudakovskaya

Authors
  1. Alexander N. Sencha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ella I. Peniaeva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Munir G. Tukhbatullin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elena A. Zubareva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Liubov A. Timofeyeva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yury N. Patrunov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Roman A. Barmin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Polina G. Rudakovskaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Visual and Functional Diagnostics, Federal State Budget Institution National Medical Research Center for Obstetrics, Moscow, Russia

    Alexander N. Sencha

  2. Department of Ultrasound Diagnostics, Clinical Hospital “RZD-Medicina”, Yaroslavl, Russia

    Yury N. Patrunov

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sencha, A.N. et al. (2022). General Aspects of the Use of Contrast Agents in Diagnostic Ultrasound. History and Current State of the Technology. Review of Contrast Agents. In: Sencha, A.N., Patrunov, Y.N. (eds) Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91764-7_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91764-7_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-91763-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-91764-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation