4.5 Review

THE ASIAN FEDERATION OF SOCIETIES FOR ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY (AFSUMB) GUIDELINES FOR CONTRAST-ENHANCED ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND

期刊

ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY
卷 47, 期 6, 页码 1433-1447

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2021.01.030

关键词

Endoscopic ultrasound; Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound; Guidelines; Techni-ques; Indications

资金

  1. AFSUMB

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Asian Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology has published consensus guidelines on CH-EUS techniques and indications based on scientific evidence, aiming to assist endosonographers in conducting CH-EUS. The guidelines include six statements on technical aspects and thirteen statements on indications.
The Asian Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology aimed to provide information on techniques and indications for contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound (CH-EUS), and to create statements including the level of recommendation. These statements are based on current scientific evidence reviewed by a Consensus Panel of 15 internationally renowned experts. The reliability of clinical questions was measured by agreement rates after voting. Six statements were made on techniques, including suitable contrast agents for CH-EUS, differences between contrast agents, setting of mechanical index, dual imaging and duration and phases for observation. Thirteen statements were made on indications, including pancreatic solid masses, pancreatic cancer staging, pancreatic cystic lesions and mural nodules, detection of subtle pancreatic lesions, gallbladder sludge and polyps, hepatic lesions, lymph nodes, subepithelial lesions, visceral vascular diseases, guidance of fine needle aspiration and evaluation for local therapy. These international expert consensus guidelines will assist endosonographers in conducting CH-EUS according to evidence-based information. (E-mail: kitano@wakayama-med.ac.jp) (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据