The first edition of the guidelines for the use of ultrasound contrast agents was published in 2004, dealing with liver applications. The second edition of the guidelines in 2008 reflected changes in the available contrast agents and updated the guidelines for the liver, as well as implementing some nonliver applications. The third edition of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) guidelines was the joint World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology-European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (WFUMB-EFSUMB) venture in conjunction with other regional US societies such as Asian Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, resulting in a simultaneous duplicate on liver CEUS in the official journals of both WFUMB and EFSUMB in 2013. However, no guidelines were described mainly for Sonazoid due to limited clinical experience only in Japan and Korea. The new proposed consensus statements and recommendations provide general advice on the use of Sonazoid and are intended to create standard protocols for the use and administration of Sonazoid in hepatic and pancreatobiliary applications in Asian patients and to improve patient management.

Because the gene expression patterns of nonobese hepatic steatosis in affected patients remain unclear, we sought to explore these patterns using an animal model of nonobese hepatic steatosis.

Objectives: The objectives of this study were to determine the primary technique effectiveness (PTE), to compare the complete response and local recurrence rates between conspicuous and inconspicuous tumors using single and switching electrodes of real-time virtual sonography (RVS)-assisted radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in conspicuous and inconspicuous hepatic tumors under conventional ultrasonography (US). Subjects and method: We compared the complete ablation of inconspicuous tumors with and without anatomical landmark (N = 54) with conspicuous liver tumors (N = 272). Conventional US imaging was done initially, and then these images were fused with CT or MRI arterial-venous-wash-out cross-sectional studies and synchronized with real-time US images. Results: RVS-assisted RFA was technically feasible in all patients. The PTE rate after the first ablation was 94% (245/261) for conspicuous tumors, 88% (7/8) in inconspicuous tumors with landmark, and 78% (36/46) in inconspicuous tumors without landmark. The complete response (p = 0.1912 vs. p = 0.4776) and local recurrence rate (p = 0.1557 vs. p = 0.7982) were comparable in conspicuous tumors of both HCC and liver metastasis group when single or multiple switching was used. The cumulative local recurrence in the conspicuous and inconspicuous tumors of the HCC group (p = 0.9999) was almost parallel after 12 (10% vs. 4%) and 24 (13% vs. 4%) months of follow-up. In the liver metastasis group, the cumulative local recurrence for conspicuous tumors (p = 0.9564) was nearly equal after 12 and 24 months of monitoring (24% vs. 27%) while no recurrence was incurred for the inconspicuous tumors. Conclusion: RVS-assisted RFA is an effective tool for the treatment of conspicuous and inconspicuous HCC and hepatic metastasis.