Comparing Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasound to contrast-enhanced CT and MRI for differentially diagnosing renal lesions: a prospective multicenter study.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced (CE) ultrasound using Sonazoid (SNZ-CEUS) by comparing with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) for differentiating benign and malignant renal masses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

306 consecutive patients (from 7 centers) with renal masses (40 benign tumors, 266 malignant tumors) diagnosed by both SNZ-CEUS, CE-CT or CE-MRI were enrolled between September 2020 and February 2021. The examinations were performed within 7 days, but the sequence was not fixed. Histologic results were available for 301 of 306 (98.37%) lesions and 5 lesions were considered benign after at least 2 year follow-up without change in size and image characteristics. The diagnostic performances were evaluated by sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and compared by McNemar's test.

RESULTS

In the head-to-head comparison, SNZ-CEUS and CE-MRI had comparable sensitivity (95.60 vs. 94.51%, P = 0.997), specificity (65.22 vs. 73.91%, P = 0.752), positive predictive value (91.58 vs. 93.48%) and negative predictive value (78.95 vs. 77.27%); SNZ-CEUS and CE-CT showed similar sensitivity (97.31 vs. 96.24%, P = 0.724); however, SNZ-CEUS had relatively lower than specificity than CE-CT (59.09 vs. 68.18%, P = 0.683). For nodules > 4 cm, CE-MRI demonstrated higher specificity than SNZ-CEUS (90.91 vs. 72.73%, P = 0.617) without compromise the sensitivity.

CONCLUSIONS

SNZ-CEUS, CE-CT, and CE-MRI demonstrate desirable and comparable sensitivity for the differentiation of renal mass. However, the specificity of all three imaging modalities is not satisfactory. SNZ-CEUS may be a suitable alternative modality for patients with renal dysfunction and those allergic to gadolinium or iodine-based agents.