Background: Handheld ultrasound (HHUS) devices have chiefly been deployed in emergency medicine, where they are considered a valid tool. The data situation is less clear in the case of internal questions in abdominal sonography. In our study, we investigate whether HHUS devices from different manufacturers differ in their B-scan quality, and whether any differences are relevant for the significance of an internal ultrasound examination. Method: The study incorporated eight HHUS devices from different manufacturers. Ultrasound videos of seven defined sonographic questions were recorded with all of the devices. The analogue recording of the same findings with a conventional high-end ultrasound (HEUS) device served as an evaluation criterion. Then, the corresponding findings were played side by side and evaluated by fourteen ultrasound experts using a point scale (5 points = very good; 1 point = insufficient). Results: The HHUS devices achieved relatively good results in terms of both the B-scan quality assessment and the ability to answer the clinical question, regardless of the manufacturer. One of the tested HHUS devices even achieved a significantly (p < 0.05) higher average points score in both the evaluation of B-scan quality and in the evaluation of clinical significance than the other devices. Regardless of the manufacturer, the HHUS devices performed best when determining the status/inferior vena cava volume and in the representation of ascites/free fluid. Conclusion: In various clinical abdominal sonography questions, HHUS systems can reliably reproduce findings, and are—while bearing their limitations in mind—an acceptable alternative to conventional HEUS systems. Irrespective of this, the present study demonstrated relevant differences in the B-scan quality of HHUS devices from different manufacturers.

Primary pulmonary sarcoma and mesothelioma are rare malignancies. The review article discusses the appearance of these tumors in B-mode ultrasound (US), color Doppler ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). In particular, the article is intended to inspire the examination of thoracic wall tumors and pleural masses with the possibilities of ultrasonography and to obtain histologically evaluable material using US or CEUS-guided sampling.

Pleural thickening can be the result of inflammation or infection but can also have a neoplastic origin. Depending on the clinical context, a pleural lesion or mass is often initially suspected of malignancy. Benign pleural tumors are rare, and their appearance on ultrasound (US) is also described less frequently than pleural metastases or malignancies. There are few descriptions of contrast-enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in particular. This review introduces the basics of transthoracic ultrasound (TUS) of the pleura and CEUS of the pleura and lung. CEUS is recommended for pulmonary applications in the EFSUMB guidelines in non-hepatic applications. This article provides an overview of the characteristics of benign pleural thickening, tumor-like lesions, and benign pleural tumors on transthoracic B-mode US with color Doppler imaging (CDI) and CEUS. In detail, characteristics in TUS and CEUS are described for infectious/inflammatory pleural thickening (empyema, tuberculous pleuritis, hemothorax, fibrothorax), pleural thickening in various systemic diseases, in tumor-like conditions (plaques, splenosis, endometriosis, mesothelial cysts, lymphangiomatosis) and benign tumors (lipoma, benign SFT, schwannoma, solitary extramedullary/extraosseous plasmacytoma). The descriptions are illustrated by corresponding US and CEUS images.

Background: Pleural effusion (PE) is a frequent complication in patients with malignancies and is often associated with poor prognosis. Lung ultrasound (LUS) has become an indispensable bedside tool for detecting, characterizing, and guiding the management of pleural effusions. Methods: This narrative review summarizes the current evidence on the diagnostic performance of LUS for PE in cancer patients, emphasizing recent advances in functional ultrasound techniques. Results: B-mode LUS can detect small-volume effusions and estimate their volume. Sonographic features such as echogenicity, septations, and pleural abnormalities can help differentiate transudative from exudative effusions. Shear-wave elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound provide additional functional information on tissue stiffness and perfusion. This information may help distinguish between malignant and benign pleural lesions and facilitate targeted biopsy when cytology is nondiagnostic. Compared with computed tomography, LUS offers superior evaluation of juxtadiaphragmatic and pleural surface abnormalities. It facilitates safe, real-time thoracocentesis. Recent innovations, including improved quality, affordable handheld ultrasound systems and artificial intelligence-based analysis, are expected to further enhance diagnostic precision and accessibility. Conclusions: Although LUS is a sensitive and versatile tool for assessing PE in cancer patients, it has limited diagnostic accuracy in distinguishing between benign and malignant effusions. Advanced techniques, such as shear-wave elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound, may further support the differentiation of malignant and benign diseases. Ongoing technological advances are likely to enhance the diagnostic accuracy and accessibility of lung ultrasound.