Perfluorobutane contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for the diagnosis of HCC: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound With Perfluorobutane for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Diagnosis: Comparison of Imaging Phases and Diagnostic Criteria

BACKGROUND. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with perfluorobutane has used varying protocols and diagnostic criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article was to assess diagnostic performance for HCC of CEUS with perfluorobutane in high-risk patients using various criteria. METHODS. This retrospective post hoc study evaluating individual patient data from three earlier prospective studies from one hospital included 204 patients (136 men, 68 women; mean age, 63 ± 11 [SD] years) at high risk of HCC with 213 liver observations. Patients underwent CEUS using perfluorobutane from March 2019 to June 2022. Three radiologists (the examination's operator and two subsequent reviewers) independently interpreted examinations, assessing arterial, portal venous (arterial phase completion through 2 minutes), transitional (2-5 minutes after injection), and Kupffer (≥ 10 minutes after injection) phase findings. Six criteria for HCC were tested: 1, any arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) with Kupffer phase hypoenhancement; 2, nonrim APHE with Kupffer phase hypoenhancement; 3, nonrim APHE with portal venous washout; 4, nonrim APHE with portal venous washout and/or Kupffer phase hypoenhancement; 5, nonrim APHE with portal venous and/or transitional washout; 6, nonrim APHE with any of portal venous washout, transitional washout, or Kupffer phase hypoenhancement. Depending on the criteria, observations were instead deemed to be a non-HCC malignancy if showing rim APHE, early washout (at < 1 minute), or marked washout (at 2 minutes). Reference was pathology for malignant observations and pathology or imaging follow-up for benign observations. Diagnostic performance was assessed, pooling readers' data. RESULTS. Criterion 1 (no recognized features of non-HCC malignancy) had highest sensitivity (86.9%) but lowest specificity (43.2%) for HCC. Compared with nonrim APHE and portal venous washout (criterion 3), the addition of Kupffer phase hypoenhancement (criterion 4), transitional washout (criterion 5), or either feature (criterion 6) significantly increased sensitivity (34.4% vs 62.6-64.2%) and accuracy (61.8% vs 75.1-76.5%), but significantly decreased specificity (98.5% vs 91.9-94.1%). Criteria 2, 4, 5, and 6 (all incorporating transitional washout and/or Kupffer phase hypoenhancement) showed no significant differences in sensitivity (62.6-64.2%), specificity (91.9-94.1%), or accuracy (75.1-76.5%). CONCLUSION. Recognition of features of non-HCC malignancy improved specificity for HCC. Incorporation of the findings of transitional washout and/or Kupffer phase hypoenhancement improved sensitivity and accuracy, albeit lowered specificity, versus arterial and portal venous findings alone, without further performance variation among criteria incorporating those two findings. CLINICAL IMPACT. Kupffer phase acquisition may be optional for observations classified as HCC or non-HCC malignancy by arterial, portal venous, and transitional phases.

Contrast-enhanced US with Sulfur Hexafluoride and Perfluorobutane: LI-RADS for Diagnosing Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Background Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) was designed for contrast-enhanced US (CEUS) with pure blood pool agents to diagnose hepatocellularfcarcinoma (HCC), such as sulfur hexafluoride (SHF), but Kupffer-cell agents, such as perfluorobutane (PFB), allow additional lesion characterization in the Kupffer phase yet remain unaddressed. Purpose To compare the diagnostic performance of three algorithms for HCC diagnosis: two algorithms based on CEUS LI-RADS version 2017 for both SHF and PFB and a modified algorithm incorporating Kupffer-phase findings for PFB. Materials and Methods This multicenter prospective study enrolled high-risk patients for HCC from June 2021 to December 2021. Each participant underwent same-day SHF-enhanced US followed by PFB-enhanced US. Each liver observation was assigned three LI-RADS categories according to each algorithm: LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, and modified PFB. For modified PFB, observations at least 10 mm with nonrim arterial phase hyperenhancement were upgraded LR-4 to LR-5 if there was no washout with a Kupffer defect and were reassigned LR-M to LR-5 if there was early washout with mild Kupffer defect. The reference standard was pathologic confirmation or composite (typical CT or MRI features, or 1-year size stability and/or reduction). Diagnostic metrics of LR-5 for HCC using the three algorithms were calculated and compared using the McNemar test. Results Overall, 375 patients (mean age, 56 years ± 11 [SD]; 318 male patients, 57 female patients) with 424 observations (345 HCCs, 40 non-HCC malignancies, 39 benign lesions) were enrolled. PFB and SHF both using LI-RADS showed no significant difference in sensitivity (60% vs 58%; P = .41) and specificity (96% vs 95%; P > .99). The modified algorithm with PFB had increased sensitivity (80% vs 58%; P < .001) and a nonsignificant decrease in specificity (92% vs 95%; P = .73) compared with LI-RADS SHF. Conclusion Based on CEUS LI-RADS version 2017, both SHF and PFB achieved high specificity and relatively low sensitivity for HCC diagnosis. When incorporating Kupffer-phase findings, PFB had higher sensitivity without loss of specificity. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry no. ChiCTR2100047035 © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Kim in this issue.

Diagnosing Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Sonazoid Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography: 2023 Guidelines From the Korean Society of Radiology and the Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology

Sonazoid, a second-generation ultrasound contrast agent, was introduced for the diagnosis of hepatic nodules. To clarify the issues with Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the Korean Society of Radiology and Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology collaborated on the guidelines. The guidelines are de novo, evidence-based, and selected using an electronic voting system for consensus. These include imaging protocols, diagnostic criteria for HCC, diagnostic value for lesions that are inconclusive on other imaging results, differentiation from non-HCC malignancies, surveillance of HCC, and treatment response after locoregional and systemic treatment for HCC.

2022 KLCA-NCC Korea practice guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer worldwide and the fourth most common cancer among men in South Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle and old age. The current practice guidelines will provide useful and sensible advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 49 experts in the fields of hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology from the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2018 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions. These guidelines provide useful information and direction for all clinicians, trainees, and researchers in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC.

2022 KLCA-NCC Korea Practice Guidelines for the Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer worldwide and the fourth most common cancer among men in South Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle and old age. The current practice guidelines will provide useful and sensible advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 49 experts in the fields of hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology from the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2018 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions. These guidelines provide useful information and direction for all clinicians, trainees, and researchers in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC.

2022 KLCA-NCC Korea practice guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fifth most common cancer worldwide and the fourth most common cancer among men in South Korea, where the prevalence of chronic hepatitis B infection is high in middle and old age. The current practice guidelines will provide useful and sensible advice for the clinical management of patients with HCC. A total of 49 experts in the fields of hepatology, oncology, surgery, radiology, and radiation oncology from the Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guideline Revision Committee revised the 2018 Korean guidelines and developed new recommendations that integrate the most up-to-date research findings and expert opinions. These guidelines provide useful information and direction for all clinicians, trainees, and researchers in the diagnosis and treatment of HCC.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in adults with chronic liver disease

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma occurs mostly in people with chronic liver disease. Worldwide, it ranks sixth in terms of incidence of cancer, and fourth in terms of cancer-related deaths. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is used as an add-on test to confirm the presence of focal liver lesions suspected as hepatocellular carcinoma after prior diagnostic tests such as abdominal ultrasound or measurement of alpha-foetoprotein, or both. According to guidelines, a single contrast-enhanced imaging investigation, with either computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), may show the typical hepatocellular carcinoma hallmarks in people with cirrhosis, which will be sufficient to diagnose hepatocellular carcinoma. However, a significant number of hepatocellular carcinomas show atypical imaging features, and therefore, are missed at imaging. Dynamic CEUS images are obtained similarly to CT and MRI images. CEUS differentiates between arterial and portal venous phases, in which sonographic hepatocellular carcinoma hallmarks, such as arterial hyperenhancement and subsequent washout appearance, are investigated. The advantages of CEUS over CT and MRI include real-time imaging, use of contrast agents that do not contain iodine and are not nephrotoxic, and quick image acquisition. Despite the advantages, the use of CEUS in the diagnostic algorithm for HCC remains controversial, with disagreement on relevant guidelines. There is no clear evidence of the benefit of surveillance programmes in terms of overall survival as the conflicting results can be a consequence of an inaccurate detection, ineffective treatment, or both. Therefore, assessing the diagnostic accuracy of CEUS may clarify whether the absence of benefit could be related to underdiagnosis. Furthermore, an assessment of the accuracy of CEUS for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma is needed for either diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma or ruling it out in people with chronic liver disease who are not included in surveillance programmes.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma of any size and at any stage in adults with chronic liver disease, in a surveillance programme or in a clinical setting. 2. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of CEUS for the diagnosis of resectable hepatocellular carcinoma in people with chronic liver disease and identify potential sources of heterogeneity in the results.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The last date of search was 5 November 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of CEUS for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in adults with chronic liver disease, with cross-sectional designs, using one of the acceptable reference standards, such as pathology of the explanted liver, and histology of resected or biopsied focal liver lesion with at least a six-month follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods to screen studies, extract data, and assess the risk of bias and applicability concerns, using the QUADAS-2 checklist. We used the bivariate model and provided estimates of summary sensitivity and specificity. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We presented uncertainty-of-the-accuracy estimates using 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 studies with 6546 participants. Studies were published between 2001 and 2021. We judged all 23 studies at high-risk of bias in at least one domain, and 13/23 studies at high concern for applicability. Most studies used different reference standards to exclude the presence of the target condition. The time interval between the index test and the reference standard was rarely defined. We also had major concerns on their applicability due to the characteristics of the participants. - CEUS for hepatocellular carcinoma of any size and stage: sensitivity 77.8% (95% CI 69.4% to 84.4%) and specificity 93.8% (95% CI 89.1% to 96.6%) (23 studies, 6546 participants; very low-certainty evidence). - CEUS for resectable hepatocellular carcinoma: sensitivity 77.5% (95% CI 62.9% to 87.6%) and specificity 92.7% (95% CI 86.8% to 96.1%) (13 studies, 1257 participants; low-certainty evidence). The observed heterogeneity in the results remains unexplained. The sensitivity analyses, including only studies with clearly prespecified positivity criteria and only studies in which the reference standard results were interpreted with no knowledge of the results about the index test, showed no differences in the results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that by using CEUS, as an add-on test following abdominal ultrasound, to diagnose hepatocellular carcinoma of any size and stage, 22% of people with hepatocellular carcinoma would be missed, and 6% of people without hepatocellular carcinoma would unnecessarily undergo further testing or inappropriate treatment. As to resectable hepatocellular carcinoma, we found that 23% of people with resectable hepatocellular carcinoma would incorrectly be unresected, while 8% of people without hepatocellular carcinoma would undergo further inappropriate testing or treatment. The uncertainty resulting from the high risk of bias of the included studies, heterogeneity, and imprecision of the results and concerns on their applicability limit our ability to draw confident conclusions.

Imaging Diagnosis of HCC: Future directions with special emphasis on hepatobiliary MRI and contrast-enhanced ultrasound

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a unique cancer entity that can be noninvasively diagnosed using imaging modalities without pathologic confirmation. In 2018, several major guidelines for HCC were updated to include hepatobiliary contrast agent magnetic resonance imaging (HBA-MRI) and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) as major imaging modalities for HCC diagnosis. HBA-MRI enables the achievement of high sensitivity in HCC detection using the hepatobiliary phase (HBP). CEUS is another imaging modality with real-time imaging capability, and it is reported to be useful as a second-line modality to increase sensitivity without losing specificity for HCC diagnosis. However, until now, there is an unsolved discrepancy among guidelines on whether to accept “HBP hypointensity” as a definite diagnostic criterion for HCC or include CEUS in the diagnostic algorithm for HCC diagnosis. Furthermore, there is variability in terminology and inconsistencies in the definition of imaging findings among guidelines; therefore, there is an unmet need for the development of a standardized lexicon. In this article, we review the performance and limitations of HBA-MRI and CEUS after guideline updates in 2018 and briefly introduce some future aspects of imaging-based HCC diagnosis.