Table 2.
Study | Number of subjects | Location of lesion | Diameter of lesion (mm) (mean) | Contrast agent | Diagnostic test performance Findings suspicious of malignancy |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sakamoto et al. (2011) [15] Japan | 29 | Stomach- 22 | Low-grade: 29 | Sonazoid® (15 μL/kg) | Grade malignant potential: |
Duodenum- 7 | High-grade: 32 | Abnormal vessel visualization and heterogeneous enhancement | |||
Sensitivity- 100%, Specificity- 63%, Accuracy- 83% | |||||
Yamashita et al. (2015) [13] Japan | 13 | Stomach- 12 | Low-grade: 24 | Sonazoid® (0.7 mL) | Grade malignant potential: |
Duodenum- 1 | High-grade: 62 | Abnormal vessel visualization | |||
Sensitivity- 100%, Specificity- 87.5%, Accuracy- 92.3% | |||||
Park et al. (2016) [14] Korea | SET- 35 | Stomach- 26 | Low-grade: 28 | SonoVue® (2.4 mL) | Grade malignant potential: |
GIST- 26 | Esophagus- 3 | High-grade: 43 | Non-enhancing spot | ||
Duodenum- 3 | Sensitivity- 63.6%, Specificity- 53.3%, Accuracy- 57.6% | ||||
Rectum- 3 |
GIST, gastrointestinal stromal tumor; SET, subepithelial tumor.