The detection rate of peptic ulcer in children is improving, with development of diagnostic procedures. Gastroscopy is the gold standard for the diagnosis of peptic ulcer, but it is an invasive procedure. Gastrointestinal contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) has the advantages of being painless, noninvasive, nonradioactive, easy to use, and safe.

To investigate the clinical value of CEUS for diagnosis and treatment of peptic ulcer in children.

We investigated 43 children with digestive tract symptoms in our hospital from January 2021 to June 2022. All children were examined by routine ultrasound, gastrointestinal CEUS, and gastroscopy. The pathological results of gastroscopy were taken as the gold standard. Routine ultrasonography was performed before gastrointestinal CEUS. Conventional ultrasound showed the thickness of the gastroduodenal wall, gastric peristalsis, and the adjacent organs and tissues around the abdominal cavity. Gastrointestinal CEUS recorded the thickness of the gastroduodenal wall; the size, location and shape of the ulcer; gastric peristalsis; and adjacent organs and tissues around the abdominal cavity. The results of routine ultrasound and gastrointestinal ultrasound were compared with those of gastroscopy to evaluate the diagnostic results and coincidence rate of routine ultrasound and gastrointestinal CEUS. All children received informed consent from their guardians for CEUS. This study was reviewed and approved by the hospital medical ethics committee.

Among the 43 children, 17 (15 male, 2 female) were diagnosed with peptic ulcer by gastroscopy. There were 26 children with nonpeptic ulcer. There were eight cases of peptic ulcer and 35 of nonpeptic ulcer diagnosed by conventional ultrasound. The diagnostic coincidence rate of peptic ulcer in children diagnosed by conventional ultrasound was 79.1% (34/43), which was significantly different from that of gastroscopy (P = 0.033). It indicates that the coincidence rate of gastrointestinal contrast-enhanced ultrasound and gastroscope is low. Fifteen cases of peptic ulcer and 28 of nonpeptic ulcer were diagnosed by CEUS. The diagnostic coincidence rate of peptic ulcer in children was 95.3% (41/43). There was no significant difference between CEUS and gastroscopy (P = 0.655). It indicates that the coincidence rate of gastrointestinal contrast-enhanced ultrasound and gastroscope is high.

Gastrointestinal CEUS has a high coincidence rate in the diagnosis of peptic ulcer in children, and can be used as a preliminary examination method.

The standard diagnostic modalities for gastrointestinal (GI) diseases have long been endoscopy and barium enema. Recently, trans-sectional imaging modalities, such as computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, have become increasingly utilized in daily practice. In transabdominal ultrasonography (US), the bowel sometimes interferes with the observation of abdominal organs. Additionally, the thin intestinal walls and internal gas can make structures difficult to identify. However, under optimal US equipment settings, with identification of the sonoanatomy and knowledge of the US findings of GI diseases, US can be used effectively to diagnose GI disorders. Thus, the efficacy of GIUS has been gradually recognized, and GIUS guidelines have been published by the World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology and the European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. Following a systematic scanning method according to the sonoanatomy and precisely estimating the layered wall structures by employing color Doppler make diagnosing disease and evaluating the degree of inflammation possible. This review describes current GIUS practices from an equipment perspective, a procedure for systematic scanning, typical findings of the normal GI tract, and 10 diagnostic items in an attempt to help medical practitioners effectively perform GIUS and promote the use of GIUS globally.

Direct ultrasound imaging findings alone have low sensitivity for diagnosing duodenal (65%) and gastric ulcers (40%). This retrospective study evaluated the efficiency of ultrasound in detecting gastric/duodenal ulcers in pediatric patients through direct and indirect findings.

We evaluated 244 children who underwent ultrasound and subsequent endoscopy within 4 weeks for direct and indirect imaging findings indicative of gastric/duodenal ulcers. Positive direct imaging findings revealed gastric or duodenal wall thickness >8 or 5 mm, respectively, and indirect findings revealed inflammatory changes, hyperechogenicity, and presence of lymph node around ulcers. Correspondingly, we calculated the sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing gastric/duodenal ulcers and used the Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney U tests to compare the frequency of findings and gastroduodenal wall thicknesses in pediatric patients with gastric/duodenal ulcers.

Overall, 6 and 24 were diagnosed with gastric and duodenal ulcers, respectively. The sensitivities of direct and indirect findings were 60.0% (18/30) and 80.0% (24/30), respectively; the corresponding specificities were 98.1% (210/214) and 97.2% (208/214). The frequency of direct and indirect sonographic findings differed significantly between patients with gastric or duodenal ulcers (18/30 versus 24/30, P = .002). Gastric and duodenal wall thicknesses were greater in patients with gastric (6.6 ± 2.6 mm versus 3.6 ± 1.4 mm; P = .003) or duodenal ulcer (5.0 ± 1.4 mm versus 2.2 ± 1.0 mm; P <.0001), respectively, than in those without.

The frequency of indirect finding was greater than that of direct finding in pediatric patients with gastric/duodenal ulcers. Therefore, sonographers should carefully evaluate indirect findings around the stomach or duodenum.

Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of wall hypertrophy of the duodenal bulb with a hyperechoic lumen, designated as the "HH sign," using ultrasound sonography (US) in pediatric duodenal ulcer (DU) patients. Study design: We performed a US for five pediatric subjects diagnosed with DU by upper gastroscopy to determine the presence of the potentially diagnostic HH sign. The sonographic images were analyzed before and after DU treatment. Computed tomography was performed in three cases and fecal occult blood test (FOBT) in all five cases. Results: Upper gastroscopy confirmed DU in all patients. While the HH sign was observed using US in four cases, with the DU located in the anterior bulb, the FOBT was positive in only one case. In these four cases, the HH sign diminished in response to treatment, as visualized by US. This was observed for both the initial as well as recurrent episodes. A mass-like region was observed in only one case, with the ulcer located in the proximity of the inferior duodenal wall. Conclusion: The HH sign is useful for the follow-up of DU, and US may be a suitable modality for the follow-up. We believe that this diagnostic marker can aid in following up a greater number of DU cases.