files/journal/2022-09-03_18-51-40-000000_599.png

Research Journal of Medical Sciences

ISSN: Online 1993-6095
ISSN: Print 1815-9346
151
Views
11
Downloads

Advanced Ultrasound Techniques in the Evaluation of Gallbladder and Biliary Tract Masses: A Comparative Study

Tamma Aravind Reddy, Madira Uma Sindhuri and K. Sai Shravan Kumar
Page: 424-430 | Received 28 Jun 2024, Published online: 22 Aug 2024

Full Text Reference XML File PDF File

Abstract

Ultrasound is crucial in evaluating gallbladder and biliary tract masses, but distinguishing between benign and malignant lesions remains challenging. Advanced techniques like contrast‐enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and elastography may improve diagnostic accuracy. The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of ultrasound, including CEUS and elastography, in identifying and differentiating gallbladder and biliary tract masses, and to correlate imaging findings with histopathological results. In this prospective study, 125 patients with suspected gallbladder or biliary tract masses underwent standard ultrasound, followed by CEUS and elastography. Key imaging parameters were compared with histopathological findings. Ultrasound observation showed Mean mass size was 3.8 cm, with 64% located in the gallbladder; 52% were hypoechoic. In CEUS 52% showed heterogeneous enhancement, with 44% displaying washout, suggestive of malignancy. Elastography showed Mean strain ratio was 3.8, with higher ratios (>4.0) linked to malignancy. Histopathology results showed Malignancy was confirmed in 68% of cases, with gallbladder carcinoma most common (40%). Ultrasound, enhanced by CEUS and elastography, improves the differentiation of benign and malignant masses in the gallbladder and biliary tract. These findings support the use of advanced ultrasound techniques in clinical practice for better diagnostic accuracy.


How to cite this article:

Tamma Aravind Reddy, Madira Uma Sindhuri and K. Sai Shravan Kumar. Advanced Ultrasound Techniques in the Evaluation of Gallbladder and Biliary Tract Masses: A Comparative Study.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36478/10.36478/makrjms.2024.8.424.430
URL: https://www.makhillpublications.co/view-article/1815-9346/10.36478/makrjms.2024.8.424.430