Imaging in Patients with Cirrhosis

Measuring HCC Tumor Size in MRI-The Sequence Matters!

BACKGROUND

The aim of this paper was to assess and compare the accuracy of common magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) pulse sequences in measuring the lesion sizes of hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) with respect to the Milan criteria and histopathology as a standard of reference.

METHODS

We included 45 patients with known HCC who underwent contrast-enhanced MRI of the liver prior to liver transplantation or tumor resection. Tumor size was assessed pathologically for all patients. The MRI protocol contained axial T2-weighted images as well as T1-weighted imaging sequences before and after application of Gd-EOB-DTPA. Tumor diameters, the sharpness of lesions, and the presence of artifacts were evaluated visually on all available MRI sequences. MRI measurements and pathologically assessed tumor dimensions were correlated using Pearson's correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman plots. The rate of misclassifications following Milan criteria was assessed.

RESULTS

The mean absolute error (in cm) of MRI size measurements in comparison to pathology was the smallest for the hepatobiliary phase T1-weighted acquisition (0.71 ± 0.70 cm, r = 0.96) and largest for the T2w turbo-spin-echo (TSE) sequence (0.85 ± 0.78 cm, r = 0.94). The misclassification rate regarding tumor size under the Milan criteria was lowest for the T2w half-Fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin-echo sequence and the hepatobiliary phase T1w acquisition (each 8.6%). The highest rate of misclassification occurred in the portal venous phase T1w acquisition and T2w TSE sequence (each 14.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

The hepatobiliary phase T1-weighted acquisition seems to be most accurate among commonly used MRI sequences for measuring HCC tumor size, resulting in low rates of misclassification with respect to the Milan criteria.

User and system pitfalls in liver imaging with LI-RADS

The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is a comprehensive system for standardizing the terminology, technique, interpretation, reporting, and data collection of liver imaging, created specifically for patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma. Over the past years, LI-RADS has been progressively implemented into clinical practice, but pitfalls remain related to user error and inherent limitations of the system. User pitfalls include the inappropriate application of LI-RADS to a low-risk patient population, incorrect measurement techniques, inaccurate assumptions about LI-RADS requirements, and improper usage of LI-RADS terminology and categories. System pitfalls include areas of discordance with the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) as well as pitfalls related to rare ancillary features. This article reviews common user pitfalls in applying LI-RADS v2018 and how to avoid preventable errors and also highlights deficiencies of the current version of LI-RADS and how it might be improved in the future. Level of Evidence:3 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:1673-1686.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Primary Hepatic Malignancies in Patients With and Without Chronic Liver Disease: A Pictorial Review

Primary hepatic malignancies are less common than metastatic diseases, but a recognition of these lesions is important for diagnosis and treatment planning. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides the most imaging information to diagnose lesions noninvasively and to narrow differential diagnoses. This paper reviews the imaging findings of chronic liver disease and primary hepatic malignancies, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), epithelioid hemangioendothelioma, hepatic angiosarcoma, and primary hepatic lymphoma. Clinical and MRI features are reviewed to improve the readers’ recognition of these tumors, allowing for a narrower differential diagnosis when liver masses are encountered on abdominal imaging.