Contrast Enhanced UltrasoundICON LiverCEUSNCT07656181
International Delphi Study to Develop Standardized Quality Criteria and a Rating Tool for Liver CEUS Image Quality Assessment
An observational study of Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound and Ultrasonic Diagnosis, run by University of Bern at 1 site in Switzerland.
Trial summary
This study aims to establish international consensus-based quality criteria for contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) examinations of the liver and to develop a standardized tool for assessing CEUS image and examination quality. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound, Ultrasonic Diagnosis, Liver
- How many people
- 35 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSwitzerland
- Study dates
- 1 Oct 2026to 30 Sep 2027
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: The study population consists of internationally recognised CEUS experts from radiology and internal medicine with extensive clinical and scientific experience in ultrasound diagnostics. Participants are recruited from multiple countries to form an interdisciplinary expert panel. Inclusion requires expertise comparable to DEGUM Level III, including substantial ultrasound experience, regular performance of CEUS examinations, and involvement in CEUS training and/or research. Approximately 35 experts will be invited for the first Delphi round, with at least 20 expected to complete all rounds. The purposive sampling approach ensures a highly specialised panel aimed at achieving expert consensus rather than statistical representativeness.
Who may be able to join
- At least 6 years of active experience in ultrasound diagnostics in internal medicine, radiology, or a related clinical field
- Independent performance of at least 5,000 ultrasound examinations Participation in structured CEUS training
- Performance of at least 800 ultrasound examinations per year in routine clinical practice
- Either: at least 100 independently performed CEUS examinations per year or more than 700 CEUS examinations in total
- Regular participation in ultrasound-related meetings, case reviews, or quality assurance activities within their institution
- Scientific involvement in CEUS, demonstrated by at least one peer-reviewed publication and/or active engagement in CEUS education or training
- Signing the consent form of the participants
Who cannot join
- Failure to meet the inclusion criteria
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Switzerland1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
University of Bern
Bern, Canton of Bern, 3007
Robin Walter, MD, +41 79 844 7134, robin.walter@unibe.ch
Robin Walther, MD
About this study
Official title: Delphi Study on Quality Indicators for CEUS Imaging of the Liver Using SonoVue® Contrast Agent
This study aims to establish international consensus-based quality criteria for contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) examinations of the liver and to develop a standardized tool for assessing CEUS image and examination quality. CEUS is an established imaging technique used in clinical practice for the characterization and assessment of focal liver lesions and other liver abnormalities. Despite its increasing use, there are currently no universally accepted or validated standards for evaluating the quality and reproducibility of CEUS examinations.
The primary objective of this project is therefore to identify robust and clinically relevant quality indicators for liver CEUS examinations through an international Delphi consensus process. The study focuses specifically on CEUS examinations performed in adult patients using the ultrasound contrast agent SonoVue®.
Read more
The project is divided into two work packages (WP). In Work Package 1 (WP1), the study team will first conduct a structured review of the available literature and discuss potential CEUS quality criteria within the research group. Based on this process, an initial catalogue of quality indicators relating to technical, procedural, and imaging characteristics relevant to liver CEUS examinations will be developed.
These proposed criteria will subsequently be evaluated through a multi-round Delphi process involving an international and interdisciplinary panel of experienced CEUS users and experts. A minimum of 35 panellists will participate across all Delphi rounds. Participants will rate their level of agreement with each proposed quality criterion using a 7-point Likert scale and may suggest additional criteria in the first round where appropriate. Newly proposed criteria supported by more than 10% of participants will be included in subsequent Delphi rounds.
During each round, panellists will receive anonymised feedback summarising the responses of the group and will be invited to re-evaluate the relevance of the proposed criteria. This iterative process will continue for at least three rounds or until predefined consensus criteria are achieved. Consensus will be defined as at least 70% agreement with a rating of 6 or higher on the Likert scale.
In Work Package 2 (WP2), the consensus-based quality criteria identified in WP1 will be operationalised into a comprehensive and standardised rating scale for CEUS image and examination quality assessment. Individual criteria will be grouped into broader data derived quality domains and transformed into practical assessment items and prompts. The proposed rating scale will use a three point scoring system (0="unacceptable quality", 1="acceptable quality", 3="High quality". The resulting rating tool will then be circulated among all Delphi panel members who completed all three Delphi rounds for final review and feedback to ensure clarity, applicability, and international usability.
The overall goal of this study is to improve standardization, quality assurance, and reproducibility in liver CEUS images and examinations. The developed consensus criteria and rating scale may support clinical practice, future research studies, multicentre collaborations, and educational initiatives by enabling more consistent evaluation of CEUS image quality across institutions and countries.
Read the detailed description
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is an established and widely used imaging modality for the evaluation of focal liver lesions and other hepatic abnormalities. It plays an increasingly important role in clinical diagnostics due to its real-time imaging capability, safety profile, and broad availability. Despite its clinical relevance, there is currently no internationally standardised definition of adequate CEUS image quality, and no validated criteria exist for its objective assessment. As a result, interpretation and perceived diagnostic quality of CEUS examinations may vary considerably between operators, institutions, and healthcare systems.
The aim of this study is to develop internationally agreed, consensus-based quality criteria for adequate CEUS image and examination quality in liver examinations and to translate these criteria into a comprehensive, universally applicable and standardised rating tool. The overall objective is to improve the reproducibility, comparability, and standardisation of CEUS examinations in both clinical practice and research settings.
To achieve this, the study is structured into two work packages (WP). Work Package 1 (WP1) focuses on identifying and refining relevant quality criteria for CEUS of the adult liver through an international and interdisciplinary Delphi consensus process.
Work Package 2 (WP2) focuses on clustering and operationalising the agreed criteria into overarching domains and developing a structured rating scale for practical application.
In WP1, a preliminary set of potential quality indicators will be generated based on a structured literature review and expert discussion within the study team. These indicators will reflect technical, procedural, and image-related aspects of liver CEUS examinations. The most commonly applied CEUS context, adult liver imaging, will serve as the clinical focus of the study. The criteria will address adequate quality of liver CEUS examinations and imaging, including image related and examination related aspects on liver CEUS using SonoVue.
An international panel of CEUS experts will be recruited based on defined expertise criteria, including extensive clinical experience in ultrasound and CEUS, training involvement, and scientific contribution to the field. Approximately 35 experts will be invited to participate in the first Delphi round, with an expected final panel size of at least 20 participants across all rounds.
The Delphi process will consist of three iterative survey rounds. In each round, participants will rate their agreement with predefined statements describing potential quality criteria using a 7-point Likert scale ranging from "completely disagree" to "completely agree," with an additional option for "outside of my expertise." Participants may also suggest additional criteria in the first round. Free-text responses will be systematically analysed, categorised, and included in subsequent rounds if supported by at least 10% of participants.
After each round, anonymised aggregated feedback will be provided to participants, including summary statistics such as median scores, interquartile ranges, and agreement rates. Participants will then be asked to reconsider and, if appropriate, revise their ratings in light of group responses. Consensus will be defined a priori as at least 70% of panellists rating a criterion as "agree" or "completely agree." Criteria not reaching consensus after repeated rounds will be revised or excluded according to predefined rules.
In Work Package 2 (WP2), the consensus-based quality criteria identified in WP1 will be operationalised into a comprehensive and standardised rating scale for CEUS image and examination quality assessment. Individual criteria will be grouped into broader data derived quality domains and transformed into practical assessment items and prompts. The proposed rating scale will use a three point scoring system (0="unacceptable quality", 1="acceptable quality", 3="High quality". The resulting rating tool will then be circulated among all Delphi panel members who completed all three Delphi rounds for final review and feedback to ensure clarity, applicability, and international usability.
WP2 will translate the final consensus-based criteria into a structured rating scale for assessing CEUS image quality. The agreed criteria will be organised into overarching domains reflecting key dimensions of image and examination quality. Within each domain, individual criteria will serve as structured prompts to guide evaluation. The resulting scale will be designed to be practical and reproducible and will use a simplified scoring system for domain-level assessment (0="unacceptable quality", 1="acceptable quality", 3="High quality").
Depending on the Delphi findings, non-imaging or technical aspects may be included as a separate domain.
The draft rating scale will be reviewed by the Delphi panel participants who completed all rounds. They will be asked to evaluate agreement with each domain and with the overall structure of the scale using a structured binary response format, with optional qualitative feedback. If predefined acceptance thresholds are not met, an additional revision round will be conducted.
Data analysis will include descriptive statistics for each criterion, including median and interquartile range, as well as calculation of agreement proportions. Responses indicating "outside of my expertise" will be treated as missing data and excluded from statistical calculations. Criteria will be evaluated against predefined consensus thresholds to determine inclusion, revision, or exclusion across Delphi rounds.
The final outcome of this study will be an internationally derived consensus set of quality criteria for liver CEUS images/examinations and a structured, standardised rating tool for assessing CEUS image quality. This framework is intended to support improved quality assurance, enhance reproducibility, and facilitate harmonisation of CEUS practice across institutions and countries in both clinical and research contexts.
- Conditions
- Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound, Ultrasonic Diagnosis, Liver
- Keywords
- Quality Indicators of Liver CEUS
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Which proposed contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) quality criteria achieve expert consensus, defined as ≥70% of panellists assigning a score of 6 ("agree") or 7 ("strongly agree") on a 7-point Delphi Likert scale, by the end of Round 3?
The number and individual content of proposed CEUS quality criteria that achieve predefined consensus after completion of the Delphi process. Consensus is defined as ≥70% of participating experts assigning a score of 6 ("agree") or 7 ("completely agree") on a 7-point Likert scale evaluating the statement: "This criterion indicates adequate quality of a CEUS examination."
The rating is based on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Higher scores indicate stronger agreement that the criterion reflects adequate CEUS image quality.
Measured: Completion of Delphi Round 3 (within six months)
Secondary outcomes (5)
What percentage of experts assigns a score of 6 or 7 on the 7-point Delphi Likert scale to each proposed CEUS quality criterion across the Delphi rounds?
For each proposed quality criterion, the percentage of participating experts assigning a rating of 6 ("agree") or 7 ("completely agree") on the 7-point Likert scale will be calculated and reported.
The rating is based on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Higher scores indicate stronger agreement that the criterion reflects adequate CEUS image quality.
Measured: After each Delphi round (within six months)
What are the median ratings for each proposed CEUS quality criterion on the 7-point Delphi Likert scale by the end of Delphi Round 3?
Median expert rating for each proposed CEUS quality criterion. Responses marked as "Outside of my expertise" will be excluded from calculation.
The rating is based on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Higher scores indicate stronger agreement that the criterion reflects adequate CEUS image quality.
Measured: After each Delphi round (within six months)
What are the interquartile ranges (IQRs) of expert ratings for each proposed CEUS quality criterion on the 7-point Delphi Likert scale across the Delphi rounds?
Interquartile range (IQR) of expert ratings for each proposed CEUS quality criterion. Lower IQR values indicate greater agreement among panellists.
The rating is based on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Higher scores indicate stronger agreement that the criterion reflects adequate CEUS image quality.
Measured: After each Delphi round (within six months)
How many quality domains are incorporated into the final CEUS image and examination quality rating scale derived from the consensus-based criteria?
Total number of domains derived from consensus-based CEUS quality criteria and incorporated into the final rating scale developed in Work Package 2.
Measured: Following completion of Work Package 2 (within six months)
What percentage of experts approve the final contrast-enhanced ultrasound image quality rating scale using binary agreement responses?
Percentage of Delphi panellists who completed all Delphi rounds and respond "Yes" to the question: "Do you agree this rating scale covers the important aspects to rate adequate CEUS image quality?"
The survey is conducted using a binary response scale (Yes/No). Higher percentages indicate greater acceptance of the final rating scale.
Measured: Final rating scale evaluation survey (within six months)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted18 Jun 2026
- Study start1 Oct 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion30 May 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Sep 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Contrast Enhanced UltrasoundStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Other
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 35 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Bern
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Robin Walter, Study chair, University of Bern
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07656181
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Delphi on CEUS: Req-2025-01086
- Acronym
- ICON LiverCEUS
- Status last verified
- Jun 2026
- First submitted
- 20 May 2026
- Last updated
- 25 Sep 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Sep 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Delphi Study on Quality Indicators for CEUS Imaging of the Liver Using SonoVue® Contrast Agent
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07656181
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- ICON LiverCEUS / Delphi on CEUS: Req-2025-01086
- Conditions
- Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound, Ultrasonic Diagnosis, Liver
- Keywords
- Quality Indicators of Liver CEUS
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 35 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University of BernUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Oct 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 30 May 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Sep 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 18 Jun 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study aims to establish international consensus-based quality criteria for contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) examinations of the liver and to develop a standardized tool for assessing CEUS image and examination quality. CEUS is an established imaging technique used in clinical practice for the characterization and assessment of focal liver lesions and other liver abnormalities. Despite its increasing use, there are currently no universally accepted or validated standards for evaluating the quality and reproducibility of CEUS examinations.
The primary objective of this project is therefore to identify robust and clinically relevant quality indicators for liver CEUS examinations through an international Delphi consensus process. The study focuses specifically on CEUS examinations performed in adult patients using the ultrasound contrast agent SonoVue®.
The project is divided into two work packages (WP). In Work Package 1 (WP1), the study team will first conduct a structured review of the available literature and discuss potential CEUS quality criteria within the research group. Based on this process, an initial catalogue of quality indicators relating to technical, procedural, and imaging characteristics relevant to liver CEUS examinations will be developed.
These proposed criteria will subsequently be evaluated through a multi-round Delphi process involving an international and interdisciplinary panel of experienced CEUS users and experts. A minimum of 35 panellists will participate across all Delphi rounds. Participants will rate their level of agreement with each proposed quality criterion using a 7-point Likert scale and may suggest additional criteria in the first round where appropriate. Newly proposed criteria supported by more than 10% of participants will be included in subsequent Delphi rounds.
During each round, panellists will receive anonymised feedback summarising the responses of the group and will be invited to re-evaluate the relevance of the proposed criteria. This iterative process will continue for at least three rounds or until predefined consensus criteria are achieved. Consensus will be defined as at least 70% agreement with a rating of 6 or higher on the Likert scale.
In Work Package 2 (WP2), the consensus-based quality criteria identified in WP1 will be operationalised into a comprehensive and standardised rating scale for CEUS image and examination quality assessment. Individual criteria will be grouped into broader data derived quality domains and transformed into practical assessment items and prompts. The proposed rating scale will use a three point scoring system (0="unacceptable quality", 1="acceptable quality", 3="High quality". The resulting rating tool will then be circulated among all Delphi panel members who completed all three Delphi rounds for final review and feedback to ensure clarity, applicability, and international usability.
The overall goal of this study is to improve standardization, quality assurance, and reproducibility in liver CEUS images and examinations. The developed consensus criteria and rating scale may support clinical practice, future research studies, multicentre collaborations, and educational initiatives by enabling more consistent evaluation of CEUS image quality across institutions and countries.
Detailed description
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is an established and widely used imaging modality for the evaluation of focal liver lesions and other hepatic abnormalities. It plays an increasingly important role in clinical diagnostics due to its real-time imaging capability, safety profile, and broad availability. Despite its clinical relevance, there is currently no internationally standardised definition of adequate CEUS image quality, and no validated criteria exist for its objective assessment. As a result, interpretation and perceived diagnostic quality of CEUS examinations may vary considerably between operators, institutions, and healthcare systems.
The aim of this study is to develop internationally agreed, consensus-based quality criteria for adequate CEUS image and examination quality in liver examinations and to translate these criteria into a comprehensive, universally applicable and standardised rating tool. The overall objective is to improve the reproducibility, comparability, and standardisation of CEUS examinations in both clinical practice and research settings.
To achieve this, the study is structured into two work packages (WP). Work Package 1 (WP1) focuses on identifying and refining relevant quality criteria for CEUS of the adult liver through an international and interdisciplinary Delphi consensus process.
Work Package 2 (WP2) focuses on clustering and operationalising the agreed criteria into overarching domains and developing a structured rating scale for practical application.
In WP1, a preliminary set of potential quality indicators will be generated based on a structured literature review and expert discussion within the study team. These indicators will reflect technical, procedural, and image-related aspects of liver CEUS examinations. The most commonly applied CEUS context, adult liver imaging, will serve as the clinical focus of the study. The criteria will address adequate quality of liver CEUS examinations and imaging, including image related and examination related aspects on liver CEUS using SonoVue.
An international panel of CEUS experts will be recruited based on defined expertise criteria, including extensive clinical experience in ultrasound and CEUS, training involvement, and scientific contribution to the field. Approximately 35 experts will be invited to participate in the first Delphi round, with an expected final panel size of at least 20 participants across all rounds.
The Delphi process will consist of three iterative survey rounds. In each round, participants will rate their agreement with predefined statements describing potential quality criteria using a 7-point Likert scale ranging from "completely disagree" to "completely agree," with an additional option for "outside of my expertise." Participants may also suggest additional criteria in the first round. Free-text responses will be systematically analysed, categorised, and included in subsequent rounds if supported by at least 10% of participants.
After each round, anonymised aggregated feedback will be provided to participants, including summary statistics such as median scores, interquartile ranges, and agreement rates. Participants will then be asked to reconsider and, if appropriate, revise their ratings in light of group responses. Consensus will be defined a priori as at least 70% of panellists rating a criterion as "agree" or "completely agree." Criteria not reaching consensus after repeated rounds will be revised or excluded according to predefined rules.
In Work Package 2 (WP2), the consensus-based quality criteria identified in WP1 will be operationalised into a comprehensive and standardised rating scale for CEUS image and examination quality assessment. Individual criteria will be grouped into broader data derived quality domains and transformed into practical assessment items and prompts. The proposed rating scale will use a three point scoring system (0="unacceptable quality", 1="acceptable quality", 3="High quality". The resulting rating tool will then be circulated among all Delphi panel members who completed all three Delphi rounds for final review and feedback to ensure clarity, applicability, and international usability.
WP2 will translate the final consensus-based criteria into a structured rating scale for assessing CEUS image quality. The agreed criteria will be organised into overarching domains reflecting key dimensions of image and examination quality. Within each domain, individual criteria will serve as structured prompts to guide evaluation. The resulting scale will be designed to be practical and reproducible and will use a simplified scoring system for domain-level assessment (0="unacceptable quality", 1="acceptable quality", 3="High quality").
Depending on the Delphi findings, non-imaging or technical aspects may be included as a separate domain.
The draft rating scale will be reviewed by the Delphi panel participants who completed all rounds. They will be asked to evaluate agreement with each domain and with the overall structure of the scale using a structured binary response format, with optional qualitative feedback. If predefined acceptance thresholds are not met, an additional revision round will be conducted.
Data analysis will include descriptive statistics for each criterion, including median and interquartile range, as well as calculation of agreement proportions. Responses indicating "outside of my expertise" will be treated as missing data and excluded from statistical calculations. Criteria will be evaluated against predefined consensus thresholds to determine inclusion, revision, or exclusion across Delphi rounds.
The final outcome of this study will be an internationally derived consensus set of quality criteria for liver CEUS images/examinations and a structured, standardised rating tool for assessing CEUS image quality. This framework is intended to support improved quality assurance, enhance reproducibility, and facilitate harmonisation of CEUS practice across institutions and countries in both clinical and research contexts.
Study design
- Observational model
- Other
- Time perspective
- Prospective
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- The study population consists of internationally recognised CEUS experts from radiology and internal medicine with extensive clinical and scientific experience in ultrasound diagnostics. Participants are recruited from multiple countries to form an interdisciplinary expert panel. Inclusion requires expertise comparable to DEGUM Level III, including substantial ultrasound experience, regular performance of CEUS examinations, and involvement in CEUS training and/or research. Approximately 35 experts will be invited for the first Delphi round, with at least 20 expected to complete all rounds. The purposive sampling approach ensures a highly specialised panel aimed at achieving expert consensus rather than statistical representativeness.
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- At least 6 years of active experience in ultrasound diagnostics in internal medicine, radiology, or a related clinical field
- Independent performance of at least 5,000 ultrasound examinations Participation in structured CEUS training
- Performance of at least 800 ultrasound examinations per year in routine clinical practice
- Either: at least 100 independently performed CEUS examinations per year or more than 700 CEUS examinations in total
- Regular participation in ultrasound-related meetings, case reviews, or quality assurance activities within their institution
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Failure to meet the inclusion criteria
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Which proposed contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) quality criteria achieve expert consensus, defined as ≥70% of panellists assigning a score of 6 ("agree") or 7 ("strongly agree") on a 7-point Delphi Likert scale, by the end of Round 3?
Time frame: Completion of Delphi Round 3 (within six months)
The number and individual content of proposed CEUS quality criteria that achieve predefined consensus after completion of the Delphi process. Consensus is defined as ≥70% of participating experts assigning a score of 6 ("agree") or 7 ("completely agree") on a 7-point Likert scale evaluating the statement: "This criterion indicates adequate quality of a CEUS examination." The rating is based on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Higher scores indicate stronger agreement that the criterion reflects adequate CEUS image quality.
5 secondary outcomes
What percentage of experts assigns a score of 6 or 7 on the 7-point Delphi Likert scale to each proposed CEUS quality criterion across the Delphi rounds?
Time frame: After each Delphi round (within six months)
What are the median ratings for each proposed CEUS quality criterion on the 7-point Delphi Likert scale by the end of Delphi Round 3?
Time frame: After each Delphi round (within six months)
What are the interquartile ranges (IQRs) of expert ratings for each proposed CEUS quality criterion on the 7-point Delphi Likert scale across the Delphi rounds?
Time frame: After each Delphi round (within six months)
How many quality domains are incorporated into the final CEUS image and examination quality rating scale derived from the consensus-based criteria?
Time frame: Following completion of Work Package 2 (within six months)
What percentage of experts approve the final contrast-enhanced ultrasound image quality rating scale using binary agreement responses?
Time frame: Final rating scale evaluation survey (within six months)
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Sep 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound
Not yet recruiting
Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound Evaluation of Indeterminate Ovarian Lesions: Prospective Multicenter Study
Ovarian Cancer, Adnexal Lesion
RecruitingPhase 2
CEUS Evaluation of Hydrocephalus in Neonates and Infants
Hydrocephalus in Infants, Hydrocephalus Acquired
RecruitingObservational study
New Diagnostic Criteria in the Evaluation Response to Ablation Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Nodules
Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Diagnostic Accuracy of Multiparametric Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Improving Detection of Ultrasound Non-mass Breast Lesions According to ACR BI-RADS v2025
Non Mass Breast Lesions
RecruitingPhase 2
Y-90 Treatment Response Using Transarterial Radioembolization
HCC, Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Robin Walter study chair
University of Bern
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound and Ultrasonic Diagnosis, run by University of Bern at 1 site in Switzerland.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 7 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Sep 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Switzerland. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Robin Walter, MD (+41 79 844 71 34, robin.walter@unibe.ch), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Which proposed contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) quality criteria achieve expert consensus, defined as ≥70% of panellists assigning a score of 6 ("agree") or 7 ("strongly agree") on a 7-point Delphi Likert scale, by the end of Round 3? (time frame: Completion of Delphi Round 3 (within six months)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 25 Sep 2026.