Current role of ultrasound for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Table 1 Sensitivity and specificity of US and other imaging modalities for the screening of HCC

Authors	US		Other modalities
	Sensitivity (%)	Specificity (%)	Sensitivity (%)	Specificity (%)
Sherman et al[35]	71.4	93.8	-	-
Chalasani et al[36]	59	93	91 (CT)	96 (CT)
1Yao et al[37]	79.4	-	81.6 (CT)	-
			88.9 (MRI)	-
Gambarin-Gelwan et al[38]	58	94	53 (CT)	94 (CT)
2Teefey et al[39]	89	75	67 (CT)	75 (CT)
			56 (MRI)	81 (MRI)
			0 (PET)	88 (PET)

¹Sensitivity of radiologic procedures in the diagnosis and staging of known HCC before liver transplantation.

²The higher value was presented from two data obtained between two observers.

Table 2 Assessment of therapeutic response after percutaneous treatment for HCC using contrast-enhanced US

Author	Treatment	No. of patients/No. of lesions	Results1 (contrast agent)
Bartolozzi et al[102]	PEI	40/47	Sensitivity 92%
			Specificity 100%
			Accuracy 98%
			(Levovist)
Wen et al[103]	RFA	67/91	Sensitivity 95.30%
			Specificity 100%
			Accuracy 98.10%
			(Levovist)
Meloni et al[104]	RFA	25/43	Sensitivity 83.30%
			Specificity 100%
			(Levovist)
Choi et al[105]	RFA	40/45	Diagnostic agreement 100%
			(Levovist)
Kim et al[106]	RFA	90/94	Diagnostic concordace2 99%
			(Levovist)
Solbiati et al[107]	RFA	20/203	Sensitivity 50%
			Specificity 100%
			Diagnostic agreement 85%
			(Levovist)
Pompili et al[110]	PEI, RFA, TACE	47/56	Sensitivity 87%
	Combined treatments		Specificity 98.40%
			Diagnostic agreement 94.60%
			(SonoVue)

¹Comparison with contrast-enhanced helical CT;

²1-mo follow-up CT;

³Solitary colorectal liver metastases.