Comparing Diagnostic Accuracy for Liver Tumours Between the Combination of CEUS and CEMRI Versus CECT and CEMRI
NCT ID: NCT03267290
Last Updated: 2020-07-01
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
12 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2017-07-01
2019-01-11
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Contrast Enhanced (CE) Ultrasound and CE Computed Tomography or CE Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Liver Masses
NCT00828607
Role of CEUS as a Secondary Diagnostic Modality
NCT04494022
Comparing the Diagnostic Efficiencies of CEUS and EOB-MRI in Patients With High Risk of HCC
NCT04212286
Diagnostic Efficacies of Sonazoid-CEUS and EOB-MRI in Patients With High Risk of HCC
NCT04212273
Comparison of Biannual Ultrasonography and Annual Unenhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for HCC Surveillance
NCT02854241
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has aroused more attentions regarding the rapidly improvement of contrast medium. In addition to Italian association for the study of the liver, the Japan society has documented CEUS as an integral part in the diagnosis algorism. Two phases, i.e. vascular phase and Kupffer phase, could be interpreted with second generation contrast agents, Sonazoid, for differentiating liver tumors. For liver tumor that failed to present washout phase in CECT or CEMRI, CEUS might be helpful because a tumor lack of contrast uptake in the Kupffer phase is favouring HCC. However, previous reports were confined to retrospective studies or small population, and more solid evidence is required to identify the diagnosis feasibility of CEUS with specific contrast agent.
In this study, the investigators conducted a prospective, single-center, open-label trial to compare the efficacy and safety of CEUS + CEMRI in characterizing HCC, in comparison with CECT + CEMRI. 60 patients with liver tumours no larger than 3cm in diameter will be enrolled, and tumour specimen will be obtained after imaging examination by tumour resection or biopsy. The primary endpoint is the sensitivity and specificity between the study groups, use the histology as reference diagnosis. The secondary endpoints include (1) the sensitivity and specificity of CEUS+CECT, CECT+CEMRI in differential diagnosis of liver tomours as malignant or benign, use the histology as reference diagnosis, (2) adverse effects, (3) vital signs (blood pressure, heart rate), and (4) laboratory values (the hematologic, renal and hepatic function change). Our exploratory endpoint is the detection rate of CEUS+CEMRI, CECT+CEMRI, use the histology as reference diagnosis.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
NA
SINGLE_GROUP
OTHER
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Sonazoid- CEUS+CEMRI or CECT+CEMRI
Comparing Diagnostic Accuracy for Liver Tumours Between the Combination of CEUS and CEMRI Versus CECT and CEMRI
Sonazoid- CEUS, CEMRI, CECT
Sonazoid- CEUS+CEMRI in a characterization of HCC, in comparison with CECT+CEMRI.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Sonazoid- CEUS, CEMRI, CECT
Sonazoid- CEUS+CEMRI in a characterization of HCC, in comparison with CECT+CEMRI.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. All patients presented with newly diagnosed liver lesion(s) with initial impression of malignancy.
3. Lesions no larger than 3cm in diameter.
4. Signed and dated informed consent
Exclusion Criteria
2. The lesion previously treated with Percutaneous Ethanol Injection, Radiofrequency Ablation, or Transarterial Chemoembolization
3. The lesion will not have histological confirmation after differential diagnosis
4. The subject had known hypersensitivity to any component of Sonazoid, including a history of allergies to eggs or egg products (i.e., manifested by full body rash, respiratory difficulty, oral or laryngeal swelling, hypotension or shock).
5. The subject was considered to be unsuitable to participate in the study by the investigator.
6. The subject was known to have a right-to-left shunt, severe pulmonary hypertension (pulmonary artery pressure \>90 mmHg) or uncontrolled systemic hypertension.
7. The subject had a recent acute coronary syndrome or clinically unstable ischaemic cardiac disease, including: evolving or ongoing myocardial infarction, typical angina at rest within the last 7 days, significant worsening of cardiac symptoms within the last 7 days, recent coronary artery intervention or other factors suggesting clinical instability (e.g., recent deterioration of electrocardiogram, laboratory or clinical findings), acute cardiac failure, Class III/IV cardiac failure, or severe rhythm disorders.
8. The subject had adult respiratory distress syndrome, severe emphysema, pulmonary vasculitis, or a history of pulmonary emboli.
9. The subject had known thrombosis within the liver, or portal, or mesenteric veins.
10. The patient with iodine/Gd allergy, lower epidermal growth factor receptor level(\<50), liver/renal dysfunction, and other condition that unsuitable to receive contrast
11. Pregnant and breastfeeding women
20 Years
70 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
National Taiwan University Hospital
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Kai-Wen Huang, MD, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
National Taiwan University Hospital
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
National Taiwan University Hospital
Taipei, , Taiwan
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
201706079MIPA
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.