1
|
Zafar S, Elbanna KY, Todd AWM, Guimaraes L, O'Brien C, Goel A, Kim TK, Khalili K. Can absolute arterial phase hyperenhancement improve sensitivity of detection of hepatocellular carcinoma in indeterminate nodules on CT? Eur Radiol 2024; 34:2256-2268. [PMID: 37775590 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-10237-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2023] [Revised: 07/06/2023] [Accepted: 07/20/2023] [Indexed: 10/01/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine if quantitative assessment of relative (R) and absolute (A) arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) and washout (WO) applied to indeterminate nodules on CT would improve the overall sensitivity of detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS One-hundred and fourteen patients (90 male; mean age, 65 years) with 210 treatment-naïve HCC nodules (190 HCCs, 20 benign) who underwent 4-phase CT were included in this retrospective study. Four radiologists independently assigned a qualitative LR (LI-RADS) category per nodule. LR-3/4 nodules were then quantitatively analyzed by the 4 readers, placing ROIs within nodules and adjacent liver parenchyma. A/R-APHE and WO were calculated, and per-reader sensitivity and specificity updated. Interobserver agreement and AUCs were calculated per reader. RESULTS Qualitative readers 1-4 categorized 57, 69, 57, and 63 nodules as LR-3/4 respectively with moderate to substantial agreement in LR category (kappa 0.56-0.69, p < 0.0001); their diagnostic performances in the detection of HCC were 80%, 73.2%, 77.4%, and 77.4% sensitivity, and 100%, 95%, 70%, and 100% specificity, respectively. A threshold of ≥ 20 HU for A-APHE increased overall sensitivity of HCC detection by 0.5-3.1% without changing specificity for the subset of nodules APHE - /WO + on qualitative read, with 2, 6, 6, and 1 additional HCC detected by readers 1-4. Relative and various A-WO formulae and thresholds all increased sensitivity, but with a drop in specificity for some/all readers. CONCLUSION Quantitatively assessed A-APHE showed potential to increase sensitivity and maintain specificity of HCC diagnosis when selectively applied to indeterminate nodules demonstrating WO without subjective APHE. Quantitatively assessed R and A-WO increased sensitivity, however reduced specificity. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT A workflow using selective quantification of absolute arterial enhancement is routinely employed in the CT assessment of renal and adrenal nodules. Quantitatively assessed absolute arterial enhancement is a simple tool which may be used as an adjunct to help increase sensitivity and maintain specificity of HCC diagnosis in indeterminate nodules demonstrating WO without subjective APHE. KEY POINTS • In indeterminate nodules categorized as LI-RADS 3/4 due to absent subjective arterial phase hyperenhancement, a cut-off for absolute arterial phase hyperenhancement of ≥ 20 HU may increase the overall sensitivity of detection of HCC by 0.5-3.1% without affecting specificity. • Relative and various absolute washout formulae and cut-offs increased sensitivity of HCC detection, but with a drop in specificity for some/all readers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Zafar
- Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Room 3-964, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - Khaled Y Elbanna
- Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Room 3-964, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - Andrew W M Todd
- Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Room 3-964, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - Luis Guimaraes
- Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Room 3-964, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - Ciara O'Brien
- Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Room 3-964, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - Ankur Goel
- Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Room 3-964, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - Tae Kyoung Kim
- Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Room 3-964, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - Korosh Khalili
- Department of Medical Imaging, University of Toronto Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Room 3-964, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2M9, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Barak-Corren Y, Herz C, Lasso A, Dori Y, Tang J, Smith CL, Callahan R, Rome JJ, Gillespie MJ, Jolley MA, O’Byrne ML. Calculating Relative Lung Perfusion Using Fluoroscopic Sequences and Image Analysis: The Fluoroscopic Flow Calculator. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2024; 17:e013204. [PMID: 38152881 PMCID: PMC10872906 DOI: 10.1161/circinterventions.123.013204] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2023] [Accepted: 10/03/2023] [Indexed: 12/29/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Maldistribution of pulmonary blood flow in patients with congenital heart disease impacts exertional performance and pulmonary artery growth. Currently, measurement of relative pulmonary perfusion can only be performed outside the catheterization laboratory. We sought to develop a tool for measuring relative lung perfusion using readily available fluoroscopy sequences. METHODS A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients with conotruncal anomalies who underwent lung perfusion scans and subsequent cardiac catheterizations between 2011 and 2022. Inclusion criteria were nonselective angiogram of pulmonary vasculature, oblique angulation ≤20°, and an adequate view of both lung fields. A method was developed and implemented in 3D Slicer's SlicerHeart extension to calculate the amount of contrast that entered each lung field from the start of contrast injection and until the onset of levophase. The predicted perfusion distribution was compared with the measured distribution of pulmonary blood flow and evaluated for correlation, accuracy, and bias. RESULTS In total, 32% (79/249) of screened studies met the inclusion criteria. A strong correlation between the predicted flow split and the measured flow split was found (R2=0.83; P<0.001). The median absolute error was 6%, and 72% of predictions were within 10% of the true value. Bias was not systematically worse at either extreme of the flow distribution. The prediction was found to be more accurate for either smaller and younger patients (age 0-2 years), for right ventricle injections, or when less cranial angulations were used (≤20°). In these cases (n=40), the prediction achieved R2=0.87, median absolute error of 5.5%, and 78% of predictions were within 10% of the true flow. CONCLUSIONS The current study demonstrates the feasibility of a novel method for measuring relative lung perfusion using conventional angiograms. Real-time measurement of lung perfusion at the catheterization laboratory has the potential to reduce unnecessary testing, associated costs, and radiation exposure. Further optimization and validation is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuval Barak-Corren
- Division of Cardiology, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Christian Herz
- Division of Pediatric Cardiac Anesthesia, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Andras Lasso
- Laboratory for Percutaneous Surgery, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON
| | | | - Jessica Tang
- Division of Cardiology, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Christopher L Smith
- Division of Cardiology, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Ryan Callahan
- Division of Cardiology, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Jonathan J Rome
- Division of Cardiology, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Matthew J Gillespie
- Division of Cardiology, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Matthew A Jolley
- Division of Cardiology, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
- Division of Pediatric Cardiac Anesthesia, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Michael L O’Byrne
- Division of Cardiology, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
- Clinical Futures, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
- Leonard Davis Institute and Center for Cardiovascular Outcomes, Quality, and Evaluative Research, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mulé S, Ronot M, Ghosn M, Sartoris R, Corrias G, Reizine E, Morard V, Quelever R, Dumont L, Hernandez Londono J, Coustaud N, Vilgrain V, Luciani A. Automated CT LI-RADS v2018 scoring of liver observations using machine learning: A multivendor, multicentre retrospective study. JHEP Rep 2023; 5:100857. [PMID: 37771548 PMCID: PMC10522871 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2023.100857] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2022] [Revised: 06/21/2023] [Accepted: 07/12/2023] [Indexed: 09/30/2023] Open
Abstract
Background & Aims Assessment of computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018 major features leads to substantial inter-reader variability and potential decrease in hepatocellular carcinoma diagnostic accuracy. We assessed the performance and added-value of a machine learning (ML)-based algorithm in assessing CT LI-RADS major features and categorisation of liver observations compared with qualitative assessment performed by a panel of radiologists. Methods High-risk patients as per LI-RADS v2018 with pathologically proven liver lesions who underwent multiphase contrast-enhanced CT at diagnosis between January 2015 and March 2019 in seven centres in five countries were retrospectively included and randomly divided into a training set (n = 84 lesions) and a test set (n = 345 lesions). An ML algorithm was trained to classify non-rim arterial phase hyperenhancement, washout, and enhancing capsule as present, absent, or of uncertain presence. LI-RADS major features and categories were compared with qualitative assessment of two independent readers. The performance of a sequential use of the ML algorithm and independent readers were also evaluated in a triage and an add-on scenario in LR-3/4 lesions. The combined evaluation of three other senior readers was used as reference standard. Results A total of 318 patients bearing 429 lesions were included. Sensitivity and specificity for LR-5 in the test set were 0.67 (95% CI, 0.62-0.72) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.87-0.96) respectively, with 242 (70.1%) lesions accurately categorised. Using the ML algorithm in a triage scenario improved the overall performance for LR-5. (0.86 and 0.93 sensitivity, 0.82 and 0.76 specificity, 78% and 82.3% accuracy for the two independent readers). Conclusions Quantitative assessment of CT LI-RADS v2018 major features is feasible and diagnoses LR-5 observations with high performance especially in combination with the radiologist's visual analysis in patients at high-risk for HCC. Impact and implications Assessment of CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 major features leads to substantial inter-reader variability and potential decrease in hepatocellular carcinoma diagnostic accuracy. Rather than replacing radiologists, our results highlight the potential benefit from the radiologist-artificial intelligence interaction in improving focal liver lesions characterisation by using the developed algorithm as a triage tool to the radiologist's visual analysis. Such an AI-enriched diagnostic pathway may help standardise and improve the quality of analysis of liver lesions in patients at high risk for HCC, especially in non-expert centres in liver imaging. It may also impact the clinical decision-making and guide the clinician in identifying the lesions to be biopsied, for instance in patients with multiple liver focal lesions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sébastien Mulé
- Service d'Imagerie Médicale, AP-HP, Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Faculté de Santé, Université Paris Est Créteil, Créteil, France
- INSERM IMRB, U 955, Equipe 18, Créteil, France
| | - Maxime Ronot
- Service de Radiologie, Hôpital Beaujon, AP-HP Nord, Clichy, France
- Université de Paris, CRI, INSERM U1149, Paris, France
| | - Mario Ghosn
- Service d'Imagerie Médicale, AP-HP, Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Faculté de Santé, Université Paris Est Créteil, Créteil, France
| | | | - Giuseppe Corrias
- Service de Radiologie, Hôpital Beaujon, AP-HP Nord, Clichy, France
| | - Edouard Reizine
- Service d'Imagerie Médicale, AP-HP, Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Faculté de Santé, Université Paris Est Créteil, Créteil, France
- INSERM IMRB, U 955, Equipe 18, Créteil, France
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Valérie Vilgrain
- Service de Radiologie, Hôpital Beaujon, AP-HP Nord, Clichy, France
- Université de Paris, CRI, INSERM U1149, Paris, France
| | - Alain Luciani
- Service d'Imagerie Médicale, AP-HP, Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Faculté de Santé, Université Paris Est Créteil, Créteil, France
- INSERM IMRB, U 955, Equipe 18, Créteil, France
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bizeul J, Ronot M, Roux M, Cannella R, Lebigot J, Aubé C, Paisant A. Evaluation of washout using subtraction MRI for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients with spontaneously T1-hyperintense nodules. Diagn Interv Imaging 2023; 104:427-434. [PMID: 37120391 DOI: 10.1016/j.diii.2023.04.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2023] [Revised: 04/04/2023] [Accepted: 04/12/2023] [Indexed: 05/01/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to assess the value of subtraction imaging on post-arterial phase images (i.e., portal venous, delayed/transitional and hepatobiliary phases) for the non-invasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in spontaneously hyperintense nodules on T1-weighted imaging in patients with cirrhosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS Forty-five patients with a total 55 hepatic nodules that were spontaneously hyperintense on T1-weighted images were initially retrieved. All patients underwent MRI examination of the liver using extracellular agent. Each nodule was assessed for sensitivity and specificity using LI-RADS (Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System) during two reading sessions performed first without then with subtraction images on post-arterial phase images. The final standard of reference was defined by a step-by-step algorithm previously published combining histology, typical imaging, alfa fetoprotein and follow-up. RESULTS Forty-six nodules (26 HCC) in 39 patients with cirrhosis were analyzed. Using LI-RADS, the sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of HCC were 64% (95% CI: 41-83) and 67% (95% CI: 41-87) without subtraction; and 73% (95% CI: 50-89) (P > 0.999) and 33% (95% CI: 13-59) (P = 0.553) on subtraction imaging using extracellular contrast agent. Fifty-five percent (22/40) of nodules displayed a washout without subtraction and 70% (28/40) did so on subtraction imaging obtained with extracellular contrast agent. Twenty nodules out of 40 (50%) were classified LI-RADS 5 without subtraction, and 28 out of 40 nodules (70%) with subtraction. CONCLUSION The results of this study suggest that the use of subtraction imaging on post-arterial phase images (i.e., PVP, DP/TP and HBP) is not relevant for the non-invasive diagnosis of HCC for spontaneously hyperintense nodules on T1-weighted images in patients with liver cirrhosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jocelyn Bizeul
- Department of Radiology, Angers University Hospital (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers), 49000 Angers, France.
| | - Maxime Ronot
- Université Paris Cité, INSERM U1149 "Center for Inflammation Research" (Centre de Recherche sur l'Inflammation), CRI, Paris, & Department of Radiology, Hôpital Beaujon, AP-HP Nord, 92110 Clichy, France
| | - Marine Roux
- HIFIH Laboratory, UPRES 3859, SFR 4208, University of Angers, 49045 Angers, France
| | - Roberto Cannella
- Université Paris Cité, INSERM U1149 "Center for Inflammation Research" (Centre de Recherche sur l'Inflammation), CRI, Paris, & Department of Radiology, Hôpital Beaujon, AP-HP Nord, 92110 Clichy, France; Section of Radiology - Department of Biomedicine, Neuroscience and Advanced Diagnostics (BiND), University Hospital "Paolo Giaccone", 90127 Palermo, Italy; Department of Health Promotion Sciences, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, PROMISE, University of Palermo, 90127 Palermo, Italy
| | - Jérôme Lebigot
- Department of Radiology, Angers University Hospital (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers), 49000 Angers, France; HIFIH Laboratory, UPRES 3859, SFR 4208, University of Angers, 49045 Angers, France
| | - Christophe Aubé
- Department of Radiology, Angers University Hospital (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers), 49000 Angers, France; HIFIH Laboratory, UPRES 3859, SFR 4208, University of Angers, 49045 Angers, France
| | - Anita Paisant
- Department of Radiology, Angers University Hospital (Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers), 49000 Angers, France; HIFIH Laboratory, UPRES 3859, SFR 4208, University of Angers, 49045 Angers, France
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Dobek A, Kobierecki M, Ciesielski W, Grząsiak O, Fabisiak A, Stefańczyk L. Usefulness of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in the Differentiation between Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Benign Liver Lesions. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13:2025. [PMID: 37370920 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13122025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/23/2023] [Revised: 06/07/2023] [Accepted: 06/07/2023] [Indexed: 06/29/2023] Open
Abstract
A differentiation between hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and benign liver lesions is required. The aim of the study was to perform an analysis of the time of enhancement of focal liver lesions in a contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) examination. The curves of enhancement and the homogeneity of the tumor enhancement were assessed. The study included 52 patients with diagnoses of hepatocellular adenoma (18), focal nodular hyperplasia (11) and HCC (28). The study included magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography and a comparison of the obtained information with CEUS. In the benign lesions groups after 20-30 s, the enhancement was similar to the liver parenchyma. In the HCC group, the enhancement was slightly less intense compared to the liver parenchyma and the benign lesions. The difference of the enhancement in the arterial phase (benign lesions vs. HCC) was p = 0.0452, and the difference of enhancement in the late venous phase (benign lesions vs. HCC) was p = 0.000003. The homogeneity of the enhancement (benign lesions vs. HCC), respectively, was p = 0.001 in the arterial phase, p = 0.0003 in the portal venous phase and p = 0.00000007 in the late venous phase. Liver tumors can be classified as benign when they are homogenous in the arterial phase and don't present washout. HCC in the arterial phase is inhomogeneous and washout is observed in the venous phases. When radiological symptoms suggest malignant lesion, CEUS can be used to select the best biopsy access.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam Dobek
- Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Norbert Barlicki Memorial Teaching Hospital No. 1, Medical University of Lodz, 90-153 Lodz, Poland
| | - Mateusz Kobierecki
- Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Norbert Barlicki Memorial Teaching Hospital No. 1, Medical University of Lodz, 90-153 Lodz, Poland
| | - Wojciech Ciesielski
- Department of General Surgery and Transplantology, Norbert Barlicki Memorial Teaching Hospital No. 1, Medical University of Lodz, 90-153 Lodz, Poland
| | - Oliwia Grząsiak
- Department of General Surgery and Transplantology, Norbert Barlicki Memorial Teaching Hospital No. 1, Medical University of Lodz, 90-153 Lodz, Poland
| | - Adam Fabisiak
- Department of Digestive Tract Diseases, Norbert Barlicki Memorial Teaching Hospital No. 1, Medical University of Lodz, 90-153 Lodz, Poland
| | - Ludomir Stefańczyk
- Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Norbert Barlicki Memorial Teaching Hospital No. 1, Medical University of Lodz, 90-153 Lodz, Poland
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Huang C, Ying S, Huang M, Qiu C, Lu F, Peng Z, Kong D. Three-Dimensional Voxel-Wise Quantitative Assessment of Imaging Features in Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13:diagnostics13061170. [PMID: 36980478 PMCID: PMC10047821 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13061170] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2023] [Revised: 03/03/2023] [Accepted: 03/10/2023] [Indexed: 03/30/2023] Open
Abstract
Voxel-wise quantitative assessment of typical characteristics in three-dimensional (3D) multiphase computed tomography (CT) imaging, especially arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) and subsequent washout (WO), is crucial for the diagnosis and therapy of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, this process is still missing in practice. Radiologists often visually estimate these features, which limit the diagnostic accuracy due to subjective interpretation and qualitative assessment. Quantitative assessment is one of the solutions to this problem. However, performing voxel-wise assessment in 3D is difficult due to the misalignments between images caused by respiratory and other physiological motions. In this paper, based on the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (v2018), we propose a registration-based quantitative model for the 3D voxel-wise assessment of image characteristics through multiple CT imaging phases. Specifically, we selected three phases from sequential CT imaging phases, i.e., pre-contrast phase (Pre), arterial phase (AP), delayed phase (DP), and then registered Pre and DP images to the AP image to extract and assess the major imaging characteristics. An iterative reweighted local cross-correlation was applied in the proposed registration model to construct the fidelity term for comparison of intensity features across different imaging phases, which is challenging due to their distinct intensity appearance. Experiments on clinical dataset showed that the means of dice similarity coefficient of liver were 98.6% and 98.1%, those of surface distance were 0.38 and 0.54 mm, and those of Hausdorff distance were 4.34 and 6.16 mm, indicating that quantitative estimation can be accomplished with high accuracy. For the classification of APHE, the result obtained by our method was consistent with those acquired by experts. For the WO, the effectiveness of the model was verified in terms of WO volume ratio.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chongfei Huang
- School of Mathematical Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China
| | - Shihong Ying
- Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310030, China
| | - Meixiang Huang
- The School of Mathematics and Statistics, Minnan Normal University, Zhangzhou 363000, China
| | - Chenhui Qiu
- School of Mathematical Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China
| | - Fang Lu
- Department of Mathematics, Zhejiang University of Science and Technology, Hangzhou 310023, China
| | - Zhiyi Peng
- Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310030, China
| | - Dexing Kong
- School of Mathematical Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Grazzini G, Chiti G, Zantonelli G, Matteuzzi B, Pradella S, Miele V. Imaging in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: what's new? Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2023; 44:145-161. [DOI: 10.1053/j.sult.2023.03.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/13/2023]
|
8
|
Xu M, Liu S, Li L, Qiao X, Ji C, Tan L, Zhou Z. Development and validation of multivariate models integrating preoperative clinicopathological and radiographic findings to predict HER2 status in gastric cancer. Sci Rep 2022; 12:14177. [PMID: 35986169 PMCID: PMC9391326 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-18433-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/04/2022] [Accepted: 08/11/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
AbstractThe combination of trastuzumab and chemotherapy is recommended as first-line therapy for patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive advanced gastric cancers (GCs). Successful trastuzumab-induced targeted therapy should be based on the assessment of HER2 overexpression. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of multivariate models based on hematological parameters, endoscopic biopsy, and computed tomography (CT) findings for assessing HER2 overexpression in GC. This retrospective study included 183 patients with GC, and they were divided into primary (n = 137) and validation (n = 46) cohorts at a ratio of 3:1. Hematological parameters, endoscopic biopsy, CT morphological characteristics, and CT value-related and texture parameters of all patients were collected and analyzed. The mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration value, morphological type, 3 CT value-related parameters, and 22 texture parameters in three contrast-enhanced phases differed significantly between the two groups (all p < 0.05). Multivariate models based on the regression analysis and support vector machine algorithm achieved areas under the curve of 0.818 and 0.879 in the primary cohort, respectively. The combination of hematological parameters, CT morphological characteristics, CT value-related and texture parameters could predict HER2 overexpression in GCs with satisfactory diagnostic efficiency. The decision curve analysis confirmed the clinical utility.
Collapse
|
9
|
De Muzio F, Grassi F, Dell’Aversana F, Fusco R, Danti G, Flammia F, Chiti G, Valeri T, Agostini A, Palumbo P, Bruno F, Cutolo C, Grassi R, Simonetti I, Giovagnoni A, Miele V, Barile A, Granata V. A Narrative Review on LI-RADS Algorithm in Liver Tumors: Prospects and Pitfalls. Diagnostics (Basel) 2022; 12:diagnostics12071655. [PMID: 35885561 PMCID: PMC9319674 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12071655] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2022] [Revised: 06/27/2022] [Accepted: 07/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Liver cancer is the sixth most detected tumor and the third leading cause of tumor death worldwide. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver malignancy with specific risk factors and a targeted population. Imaging plays a major role in the management of HCC from screening to post-therapy follow-up. In order to optimize the diagnostic-therapeutic management and using a universal report, which allows more effective communication among the multidisciplinary team, several classification systems have been proposed over time, and LI-RADS is the most utilized. Currently, LI-RADS comprises four algorithms addressing screening and surveillance, diagnosis on computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), diagnosis on contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and treatment response on CT/MRI. The algorithm allows guiding the radiologist through a stepwise process of assigning a category to a liver observation, recognizing both major and ancillary features. This process allows for characterizing liver lesions and assessing treatment. In this review, we highlighted both major and ancillary features that could define HCC. The distinctive dynamic vascular pattern of arterial hyperenhancement followed by washout in the portal-venous phase is the key hallmark of HCC, with a specificity value close to 100%. However, the sensitivity value of these combined criteria is inadequate. Recent evidence has proven that liver-specific contrast could be an important tool not only in increasing sensitivity but also in diagnosis as a major criterion. Although LI-RADS emerges as an essential instrument to support the management of liver tumors, still many improvements are needed to overcome the current limitations. In particular, features that may clearly distinguish HCC from cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) and combined HCC-CCA lesions and the assessment after locoregional radiation-based therapy are still fields of research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Federica De Muzio
- Department of Medicine and Health Sciences V. Tiberio, University of Molise, 86100 Campobasso, Italy;
| | - Francesca Grassi
- Division of Radiology, Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 81100 Naples, Italy; (F.G.); (F.D.); (R.G.)
| | - Federica Dell’Aversana
- Division of Radiology, Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 81100 Naples, Italy; (F.G.); (F.D.); (R.G.)
| | - Roberta Fusco
- Medical Oncology Division, Igea SpA, 80013 Naples, Italy
- Correspondence:
| | - Ginevra Danti
- Division of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Careggi, 50134 Florence, Italy; (G.D.); (F.F.); (G.C.); (V.M.)
- Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM), SIRM Foundation, 20122 Milan, Italy; (P.P.); (F.B.)
| | - Federica Flammia
- Division of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Careggi, 50134 Florence, Italy; (G.D.); (F.F.); (G.C.); (V.M.)
- Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM), SIRM Foundation, 20122 Milan, Italy; (P.P.); (F.B.)
| | - Giuditta Chiti
- Division of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Careggi, 50134 Florence, Italy; (G.D.); (F.F.); (G.C.); (V.M.)
- Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM), SIRM Foundation, 20122 Milan, Italy; (P.P.); (F.B.)
| | - Tommaso Valeri
- Department of Clinical Special and Dental Sciences, University Politecnica delle Marche, 60126 Ancona, Italy; (T.V.); (A.A.); (A.G.)
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University Hospital Ospedali Riuniti, Via Tronto 10/a, 60126 Torrette, Italy
| | - Andrea Agostini
- Department of Clinical Special and Dental Sciences, University Politecnica delle Marche, 60126 Ancona, Italy; (T.V.); (A.A.); (A.G.)
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University Hospital Ospedali Riuniti, Via Tronto 10/a, 60126 Torrette, Italy
| | - Pierpaolo Palumbo
- Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM), SIRM Foundation, 20122 Milan, Italy; (P.P.); (F.B.)
- Area of Cardiovascular and Interventional Imaging, Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Abruzzo Health Unit 1, 67100 L’Aquila, Italy
| | - Federico Bruno
- Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM), SIRM Foundation, 20122 Milan, Italy; (P.P.); (F.B.)
- Emergency Radiology, San Salvatore Hospital, Via Lorenzo Natali 1, 67100 L’Aquila, Italy;
| | - Carmen Cutolo
- Department of Medicine, Surgery and Dentistry, University of Salerno, 84084 Fisciano, Italy;
| | - Roberta Grassi
- Division of Radiology, Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, 81100 Naples, Italy; (F.G.); (F.D.); (R.G.)
- Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM), SIRM Foundation, 20122 Milan, Italy; (P.P.); (F.B.)
| | - Igino Simonetti
- Radiology Division, Istituto Nazionale Tumori-IRCCS-Fondazione G. Pascale, Via Mariano Semmola, 80131 Naples, Italy; (I.S.); (V.G.)
| | - Andrea Giovagnoni
- Department of Clinical Special and Dental Sciences, University Politecnica delle Marche, 60126 Ancona, Italy; (T.V.); (A.A.); (A.G.)
- Department of Radiological Sciences, University Hospital Ospedali Riuniti, Via Tronto 10/a, 60126 Torrette, Italy
| | - Vittorio Miele
- Division of Radiology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Careggi, 50134 Florence, Italy; (G.D.); (F.F.); (G.C.); (V.M.)
- Italian Society of Medical and Interventional Radiology (SIRM), SIRM Foundation, 20122 Milan, Italy; (P.P.); (F.B.)
| | - Antonio Barile
- Emergency Radiology, San Salvatore Hospital, Via Lorenzo Natali 1, 67100 L’Aquila, Italy;
| | - Vincenza Granata
- Radiology Division, Istituto Nazionale Tumori-IRCCS-Fondazione G. Pascale, Via Mariano Semmola, 80131 Naples, Italy; (I.S.); (V.G.)
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Müller L, Hahn F, Jungmann F, Mähringer-Kunz A, Stoehr F, Halfmann MC, Pinto Dos Santos D, Hinrichs J, Auer TA, Düber C, Kloeckner R. Quantitative washout in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing TACE: an imaging biomarker for predicting prognosis? Cancer Imaging 2022; 22:5. [PMID: 35016731 PMCID: PMC8753936 DOI: 10.1186/s40644-022-00446-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2021] [Accepted: 12/31/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The delayed percentage attenuation ratio (DPAR) was recently identified as a novel predictor of an early complete response in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) undergoing transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). In this study, we aimed to validate the role of DPAR as a predictive biomarker for short-, mid-, and long-term outcomes after TACE. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed laboratory and imaging data for 103 treatment-naïve patients undergoing initial TACE treatment at our tertiary care center between January 2016 and November 2020. DPAR and other washin and washout indices were quantified in the triphasic computed tomography performed before the initial TACE. The correlation of DPAR and radiologic response was investigated. Furthermore, the influence of DPAR on the 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-month survival rates and the median overall survival (OS) was compared to other established washout indices and estimates of tumor burden and remnant liver function. RESULTS The DPAR was significantly of the target lesions (TLs) with objective response to TACE after the initial TACE session was significantly higher compared to patients with stable disease (SD) or progressive disease (PD) (125 (IQR 118-134) vs 110 (IQR 103-116), p < 0.001). Furthermore, the DPAR was significantly higher in patients who survived the first 6 months after TACE (122 vs. 115, p = 0.04). In addition, the number of patients with a DPAR > 120 was significantly higher in this group (n = 38 vs. n = 8; p = 0.03). However, no significant differences were observed in the 12-, 18-, and 24-month survival rates after the initial TACE. Regarding the median OS, no significant difference was observed for patients with a high DPAR compared to those with a low DPAR (18.7 months vs. 12.7 months, p = 0.260). CONCLUSIONS Our results confirm DPAR as the most relevant washout index for predicting the short-term outcome of patients with HCC undergoing TACE. However, DPAR and the other washout indices were not predictive of mid- and long-term outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lukas Müller
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckst. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| | - Felix Hahn
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckst. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| | - Florian Jungmann
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckst. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| | - Aline Mähringer-Kunz
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckst. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| | - Fabian Stoehr
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckst. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| | - Moritz C Halfmann
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckst. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| | - Daniel Pinto Dos Santos
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Jan Hinrichs
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany
| | - Timo A Auer
- Department of Radiology, Charité - University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Christoph Düber
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckst. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| | - Roman Kloeckner
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Langenbeckst. 1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Computed Tomography Techniques, Protocols, Advancements, and Future Directions in Liver Diseases. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2021; 29:305-320. [PMID: 34243919 DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2021.05.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
Computed tomography (CT) is often performed as the initial imaging study for the workup of patients with known or suspected liver disease. Our article reviews liver CT techniques and protocols in clinical practice along with updates on relevant CT advances, including wide-detector CT, radiation dose optimization, and multienergy scanning, that have already shown clinical impact. Particular emphasis is placed on optimizing the late arterial phase of enhancement, which is critical to evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma. We also discuss emerging techniques that may soon influence clinical care.
Collapse
|
12
|
Sofia C, Cattafi A, Silipigni S, Pitrone P, Carerj ML, Marino MA, Pitrone A, Ascenti G. Portal vein thrombosis in patients with chronic liver diseases: From conventional to quantitative imaging. Eur J Radiol 2021; 142:109859. [PMID: 34284232 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109859] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2021] [Revised: 06/22/2021] [Accepted: 07/07/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Portal vein thrombosis is a pathological condition characterized by the lumen occlusion of the portal vein and its intrahepatic branches, commonly associated to chronic liver diseases. Portal vein thrombosis is often asymptomatic and discovered as an incidental finding in the follow-up of chronic hepatopathy. Imaging plays a pivotal role in the detection and characterization of portal vein thrombosis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Ultrasound and Color-Doppler ultrasound are usually the first-line imaging modalities for its detection, but they have limits related to operator-experience, patient size, meteorism and the restrained field-of view. Unenhanced cross-sectional imaging doesn't provide specific signs of portal vein thrombosis except under certain specific circumstances. Conventional contrast-enhanced imaging can depict portal vein thrombosis as an endoluminal filling defect best detected in venous phase and can differentiate between non-neoplastic and neoplastic thrombus based on the contrast enhanced uptake, but not always rule-out the malignant nature. Functional and quantitative imaging techniques and software seem to be more accurate. The purpose of this work is to provide the reader with an accurate overview focused on the main imaging features of portal vein thrombosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Sofia
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphologic and Functional Imaging, Policlinico Universitario G.Martino, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
| | - A Cattafi
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphologic and Functional Imaging, Policlinico Universitario G.Martino, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - S Silipigni
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphologic and Functional Imaging, Policlinico Universitario G.Martino, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - P Pitrone
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphologic and Functional Imaging, Policlinico Universitario G.Martino, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - M L Carerj
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphologic and Functional Imaging, Policlinico Universitario G.Martino, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - M A Marino
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphologic and Functional Imaging, Policlinico Universitario G.Martino, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - A Pitrone
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphologic and Functional Imaging, Policlinico Universitario G.Martino, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| | - G Ascenti
- Department of Biomedical Sciences and Morphologic and Functional Imaging, Policlinico Universitario G.Martino, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Assessment of factors affecting washout appearance of hepatocellular carcinoma on CT. Eur Radiol 2021; 31:7760-7770. [PMID: 33856517 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-021-07897-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2021] [Accepted: 03/16/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To identify independent imaging and histopathologic factors that affect washout appearance of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in CT images. METHODS This retrospective study included 264 patients who had undergone surgical resection for treatment-naïve single HCC between January 2014 and December 2015 and had available preoperative multiphasic CT images. Two reviewers evaluated the CT imaging features of HCC using LI-RADS v2018. The "washout" was visually assessed in portal venous or equilibrium phases. Depending on the presence of washout appearance of HCC, all patients were divided into "washout" (n = 228) and "no washout" (n = 36) groups. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with the absence of washout appearance of HCC. RESULTS A total of 264 HCCs (median size, 2.6 cm) were analyzed. Histologically proven hepatic steatosis (macrovesicular steatosis ≥ 5%) (odds ratio [OR], 2.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-6.74; p = 0.040), tumor capsule on histopathology (OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.06-0.50; p = 0.001), and mosaic appearance on CT image (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.14-0.85; p = 0.021) were independent factors associated with the absence of washout appearance of HCC. In 189 patients with available unenhanced CT images, CT-diagnosed hepatic steatosis was also an independent factor for the absence of washout appearance of HCC (OR, 9.26; 95% CI, 3.06-28.02; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Washout appearance of HCC in CT images could be obscured in both histologically proven hepatic steatosis and CT-diagnosed hepatic steatosis, and could be enhanced with tumor capsule on histopathology and mosaic appearance on CT image. KEY POINTS • Hepatic steatosis is an independent factor related to the absence of washout appearance of hepatocellular carcinoma in CT images, in both histologically proven hepatic steatosis and CT-diagnosed hepatic steatosis. • Both histologically proven hepatic steatosis and CT-diagnosed hepatic steatosis have higher odds of absence of washout appearance of hepatocellular carcinoma compared to non-steatotic liver. • Tumor capsule on histopathology and mosaic appearance on CT image are independent factors that enhance the probability that washout appearance of hepatocellular carcinoma is visible.
Collapse
|
14
|
Quantitative assessment of HCC wash-out on CT is a predictor of early complete response to TACE. Eur Radiol 2021; 31:6578-6588. [PMID: 33738601 PMCID: PMC8379130 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-021-07792-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/19/2020] [Revised: 01/17/2021] [Accepted: 02/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To investigate the predictive value of four-phase contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) for early complete response (CR) to drug-eluting-bead transarterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE), with a particular focus on the quantitatively assessed wash-in and wash-out. METHODS A retrospective analysis of preprocedural CECTs was performed for 129 HCC nodules consecutively subjected to DEB-TACE as first-line therapy. Lesion size, location, and margins were recorded. For the quantitative analysis, the following parameters were computed: contrast enhancement ratio (CER) and lesion-to-liver contrast ratio (LLC) as estimates of wash-in; absolute and relative wash-out (WOabs and WOrel) and delayed percentage attenuation ratio (DPAR) as estimates of wash-out. The early radiological response of each lesion was assessed by the mRECIST criteria and dichotomized in CR versus others (partial response, stable disease, and progressive disease). RESULTS All quantitatively assessed wash-out variables had significantly higher rates for CR lesions (WOabs p = 0.01, WOrel p = 0.01, and DPAR p = 0.00002). However, only DPAR demonstrated an acceptable discriminating ability, quantified by AUC = 0.80 (95% CI0.73-0.88). In particular, nodules with DPAR ≥ 120 showed an odds ratio of 3.3(1.5-7.2) for CR (p = 0.0026). When accompanied by smooth lesion margins, DPAR ≥ 120 lesions showed a 78% CR rate at first follow-up imaging. No significative association with CR was found for quantitative wash-in estimates (CER and LLC). CONCLUSIONS Based on preprocedural CECT, the quantitative assessment of HCC wash-out is useful in predicting early CR after DEB-TACE. Among the different formulas for wash-out quantification, DPAR has the best discriminating ability. When associated, DPAR ≥ 120 and smooth lesion margins are related to relatively high CR rates. KEY POINTS • A high wash-out rate, quantitatively assessed during preprocedural four-phase contrast-enhanced CT (CECT), is a favorable predictor for early radiological complete response of HCC to drug-eluting-bead chemoembolization (DEB-TACE). • The arterial phase of CECT shows great dispersion of attenuation values among different lesions, even when a standardized protocol is used, limiting its usefulness for quantitative analyses. • Among the different formulas used to quantify the wash-out rate (absolute wash-out, relative wash-out, and delayed percentage attenuation ratio), the latter (DPAR), based only on the delayed phase, is the most predictive (AUC = 0.80), showing a significant association with complete response for values above 120.
Collapse
|
15
|
Virtual monoenergetic images from spectral detector computed tomography facilitate washout assessment in arterially hyper-enhancing liver lesions. Eur Radiol 2020; 31:3468-3477. [PMID: 33180163 PMCID: PMC8043945 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-07379-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2020] [Revised: 08/20/2020] [Accepted: 10/06/2020] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Objectives To investigate whether the increased soft tissue contrast of virtual monoenergetic images (VMIs) obtained from a spectral detector computed tomography (SDCT) system improves washout assessment of arterially hyper-enhancing liver lesions. Methods Fifty-nine arterially hyper-enhancing lesions in 31 patients (age 65 ± 9 years, M/W 20/11) were included in this IRB-approved study. All patients underwent multi-phase SDCT for HCC screening. MRI, CEUS or biopsy within 3 months served as standard of reference to classify lesions as LiRADS 3 or 4/5. VMIs and conventional images (CIs) were reconstructed. Visual analysis was performed on 40, 60, and 80 kiloelectronvolt (keV) and CIs by 3 radiologists. Presence and visibility of washout were assessed; image quality and confidence of washout evaluation were evaluated on 5-point Likert scales. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), lesion-to-liver contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) (|HUlesion–HUliver|/SDliver) and washout (|HUlesion–HUliver|) were calculated. Statistical assessment was performed using ANOVA and Wilcoxon test. Results On subjective lesion analysis, the highest level of diagnostic confidence and highest sensitivity for the detection of lesion washout were found for 40-keV VMIs (40 keV vs. CI, 81.3 vs. 71.3%). Image quality parameters were significantly better in low-kiloelectronvolt VMIs than in CIs (p < 0.05; e.g. SNRliver: 40 keV vs. CIs, 12.5 ± 4.1 vs. 5.6 ± 1.6). In LiRADS 4/5 lesions, CNR and quantitative washout values were significantly higher in 40-keV VMIs compared to CIs (p < 0.05; e.g. CNR and washout in 40 keV vs. CIs, 2.3 ± 1.6 vs. 0.8 ± 0.5 and 29.0 ± 19.1 vs. 12.9 ± 6.9 HU, respectively). Conclusion By increasing lesion contrast, low-kiloelectronvolt VMIs obtained from SDCT improve washout assessment of hyper-enhancing liver lesions with respect to washout visibility and diagnostic confidence. Key Points • Low-kiloelectronvolt virtual monoenergetic images from spectral detector CT facilitate washout assessment in arterially hyper-enhancing liver lesions. • Image quality and quantitative washout parameters as well as subjective washout visibility and diagnostic confidence benefit from low-kiloelectronvolt virtual monoenergetic images. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00330-020-07379-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
|
16
|
Min JH, Kang TW, Kim YY, Cha DI, Kim YK, Kim SH, Sinn DH, Ha SY, Kim K. Vanishing washout of hepatocellular carcinoma according to the presence of hepatic steatosis: diagnostic performance of CT and MRI. Eur Radiol 2020; 31:3315-3325. [PMID: 33159576 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-07438-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2020] [Revised: 08/14/2020] [Accepted: 10/16/2020] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To compare the presence of washout and the diagnostic performance of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) according to the presence of hepatic steatosis. METHODS This retrospective study included 566 patients with chronic liver disease who had undergone hepatic resection for hepatic tumors (482 HCCs and 84 non-HCCs) between January 2016 and June 2018 and had available multiphasic CT and MR images. Patients were allocated in the fatty liver (n = 141) or non-fatty liver (n = 425) group according to the presence of hepatic steatosis, defined as lipid droplets in at least 5% of hepatocytes on pathological examination. The presence of HCC washout and the diagnostic performance of CT and MRI for HCC were compared between the groups. RESULTS HCC washout was less frequently seen in the fatty liver group than in the non-fatty liver group on CT (61.5% vs. 88.9%, p < 0.001), whereas it was similarly present on MRI in both groups (77.0% vs. 74.4%, p = 0.565). For diagnosis of HCC, the sensitivity (53.3% vs. 80.0%, p < 0.001) and accuracy (53.9% vs. 80.9%, p < 0.001) of CT were lower in the fatty liver group than in the non-fatty liver group. However, for MRI, these values were not significantly different between the groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS Hepatic steatosis significantly decreased the performance of CT for the diagnosis of HCC, whereas it did not significantly alter the performance of MRI. KEY POINTS • Unlike MRI, there is vanishing HCC washout on CT caused by the background hepatic steatosis. • The diagnostic performance of CT for the diagnosis of HCC was significantly altered by hepatic steatosis. • The optimal cutoff HU value of the liver parenchyma for the vanishing washout of HCC was < 50 HU on unenhanced CT images.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ji Hye Min
- Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-Ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, South Korea
| | - Tae Wook Kang
- Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-Ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, South Korea.
| | - Yeon-Yoon Kim
- Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-Ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, South Korea.,Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiological Science, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Dong Ik Cha
- Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-Ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, South Korea
| | - Young Kon Kim
- Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-Ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, South Korea
| | - Seong Hyun Kim
- Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-Ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, South Korea
| | - Dong Hyun Sinn
- Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Sang Yun Ha
- Department of Pathology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Kyunga Kim
- Biostatics and Clinical Epidemiology Center, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Jamwal R, Krishnan V, Kushwaha DS, Khurana R. Hepatocellular carcinoma in non-cirrhotic versus cirrhotic liver: a clinico-radiological comparative analysis. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2020; 45:2378-2387. [PMID: 32372205 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-020-02561-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
AIM To compare clinico-radiological pattern of non-cirrhotic versus cirrhotic HCC and correlate them with histopathological tumor grade. MATERIALS AND METHODS This prospective study was carried out on 94 patients enrolled following ultrasound diagnosis of a liver mass measuring > 3 cm. Multiphasic MDCT was performed on all treatment-naïve cases and 56 cases with imaging pattern consistent with unifocal HCC were selected. Background liver parenchyma was assessed on ultrasound for cirrhosis and NAFLD. Cases were categorized into cirrhotic liver (CL) and non-cirrhotic liver (NCL) groups with 26 and 30 cases, respectively, and guided biopsy of each liver mass was performed. AFP levels were compared in both groups. Serum markers for hepatitis B and C were assessed. Masses in both groups were compared for morphology, attenuation on each phase and washout time. Presence of capsule, corona enhancement, satellite nodules and portal vein invasion was noted. RESULTS AFP level was higher in CL group. HBV serum marker was raised in both groups. Most HCCs in NCL were moderately differentiated (histopathology), larger, had well-defined margins, showed mosaic pattern of enhancement, complete capsule and delayed phase washout. Majority in CL group were poorly differentiated, smaller, had ill-defined margins, showed heterogeneous enhancement, absent capsule and portal venous phase washout. Time of washout correlated with histopathological differentiation of masses, with earlier washout indicating poorer differentiation. CONCLUSION HCCs in NCL have different clinico-radiological characteristics than HCCs in CL. Time of contrast washout correlates with histopathological grade of HCC. Non-cirrhotic NAFLD may require formulation of new screening guidelines for HCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rupie Jamwal
- Department of Radiology, Vardhaman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India
| | - Venkatram Krishnan
- Department of Radiology, Vardhaman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India.
| | - Dinesh Singh Kushwaha
- Department of Radiology, Vardhaman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India
| | - Rajat Khurana
- Department of Radiology, Vardhaman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2018: What Radiologists Need to Know. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2020; 44:168-177. [PMID: 32195795 DOI: 10.1097/rct.0000000000000995] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
In this article, we aim to review Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System version 18 (LI-RADS v2018). Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary hepatic malignancy. Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System developed for standardizing interpreting, reporting, and data collection of HCC describes 5 major features for accurate HCC diagnosis and several ancillary features, some favoring HCC in particular or malignancy in general and others favoring benignity. Untreated hepatic lesions LI-RADS affords 8 unique categories based on imaging appearance on computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, which indicate the possibility of HCC or malignancy with or without tumor in vein. Furthermore, LI-RADS defines 4 treatment response categories for treated HCCs after different locoregional therapy. These continuous recent updates on LI-RADS improve the communication between the radiologists and the clinicians for better management and patient outcome.
Collapse
|
19
|
Diagnostic Accuracy of Single-Phase Computed Tomography Texture Analysis for Prediction of LI-RADS v2018 Category. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2020; 44:188-192. [PMID: 32195797 DOI: 10.1097/rct.0000000000001003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to determine if texture analysis can classify liver observations likely to be hepatocellular carcinoma based on the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) using single portal venous phase computed tomography. METHODS This research ethics board-approved retrospective cohort study included 64 consecutive LI-RADS observations. Individual observation texture analysis features were compared using Kruskal-Wallis and 2 sample t tests. Logistic regression was used for prediction of LI-RADS group. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves and Youden method. RESULTS Multiple texture features were associated with LI-RADS including the mean HU (P = 0.003), median (P = 0.002), minimum (P = 0.010), maximum (P = 0.013), standard deviation (P = 0.009), skewness (P = 0.007), and entropy (P < 0.001). On logistic regression, LI-RADS group could be predicted with area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.98, 96%, and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Texture analysis features on portal venous phase computed tomography can identify liver observations likely to be hepatocellular carcinoma, which may preclude the need to recall some patients for additional multiphase imaging.
Collapse
|
20
|
Does quantitative assessment of arterial phase hyperenhancement and washout improve LI-RADS v2018–based classification of liver lesions? Eur Radiol 2020; 30:2922-2933. [DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06596-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2019] [Revised: 11/08/2019] [Accepted: 11/18/2019] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
|
21
|
Interobserver Agreement of Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System Version 2018. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2020; 44:118-123. [PMID: 31939892 DOI: 10.1097/rct.0000000000000945] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
AIM This study aimed to assess the interobserver agreement of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2018 (LI-RADS v2018). SUBJECTS AND METHODS Retrospective analysis was done for 119 consecutive patients (77 male and 42 female) at risk of hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent dynamic contrast MR imaging. Image analysis was done by 2 independent and blinded readers for arterial phase hyperenhancement, washout appearance, enhancing capsule appearance, and size. Hepatic lesions were classified into 7 groups according to LI-RADS v2018. RESULTS There was excellent interobserver agreement of both reviewers for LR version 4 (κ = 0.887, P = 0.001) with 90.76% agreement. There was excellent interobserver agreement for nonrim arterial phase hyperenhancement (κ = 0.948; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-0.99; P = 0.001), washout appearance (κ = 0.949; 95% CI, 0.89-1.0; P = 0.001); and enhancing capsule (κ = 0.848; 95% CI, 0.73-0.97; P = 0.001) and excellent reliability of size (interclass correlation, 0.99; P = 0.001). There was excellent interobserver agreement for LR-1 (κ = 1.00, P = 0.001), LR-2 (κ = 0.94, P = 0.001), LR-5 (κ = 0.839, P = 0.001), LR-M (κ = 1.00, P = 0.001), and LR-TIV (κ = 1.00; 95% CI, 1.0-1.0; P = 0.001), and good agreement for LR-3 (κ = 0.61, P = 0.001) and LR-4 (κ = 0.61, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION MR imaging of LI-RADS v2018 is a reliable imaging modality and reporting system that may be used for standard interpretation of hepatic focal lesions.
Collapse
|
22
|
Lahan-Martins D, Perales SR, Gallani SK, da Costa LBE, Lago EAD, Boin IDFSF, Caserta NMG, de Ataide EC. Microvascular invasion in hepatocellular carcinoma: is it predictable with quantitative computed tomography parameters? Radiol Bras 2019; 52:287-292. [PMID: 31656344 PMCID: PMC6808613 DOI: 10.1590/0100-3984.2018.0123] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective To investigate whether quantitative computed tomography (CT) measurements
can predict microvascular invasion (MVI) in hepatocellular carcinoma
(HCC). Materials and Methods This was a retrospective analysis of 200 cases of surgically proven HCCs in
125 consecutive patients evaluated between March 2010 and November 2017. We
quantitatively measured regions of interest in lesions and adjacent areas of
the liver on unenhanced CT scans, as well as in the arterial, portal venous,
and equilibrium phases on contrast-enhanced CT scans. Enhancement profiles
were analyzed and compared with histopathological references of MVI.
Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used in order
to evaluate CT parameters as potential predictors of MVI. Results Of the 200 HCCs, 77 (38.5%) showed evidence of MVI on histopathological
analysis. There was no statistical difference between HCCs with MVI and
those without, in terms of the percentage attenuation ratio in the portal
venous phase (114.7 vs. 115.8) and equilibrium phase (126.7 vs. 128.2), as
well as in terms of the relative washout ratio, also in the portal venous
and equilibrium phases (15.0 vs. 8.2 and 31.4 vs. 26.3, respectively). Conclusion Quantitative dynamic CT parameters measured in the preoperative period do
not appear to correlate with MVI in HCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Lahan-Martins
- Hospital de Clínicas da Universidade Estadual de Campinas (HC-Unicamp), Campinas, SP, Brazil
| | - Simone Reges Perales
- Hospital de Clínicas da Universidade Estadual de Campinas (HC-Unicamp), Campinas, SP, Brazil
| | - Stephanie Kilaris Gallani
- Faculdade de Ciências Médicas da Universidade Estadual de Campinas (FCM-Unicamp), Campinas, SP, Brazil
| | | | | | | | | | - Elaine Cristina de Ataide
- Faculdade de Ciências Médicas da Universidade Estadual de Campinas (FCM-Unicamp), Campinas, SP, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Van Wettere M, Purcell Y, Bruno O, Payancé A, Plessier A, Rautou PE, Cazals-Hatem D, Valla D, Vilgrain V, Ronot M. Low specificity of washout to diagnose hepatocellular carcinoma in nodules showing arterial hyperenhancement in patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome. J Hepatol 2019; 70:1123-1132. [PMID: 30654065 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2019.01.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2018] [Revised: 12/11/2018] [Accepted: 01/04/2019] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS It remains unclear whether the classic imaging criteria for the non-invasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) can be applied to chronic vascular liver diseases, such as Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS). Herein, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of washout for the discrimination between benign and malignant lesions in patients with BCS. METHODS This retrospective study included all patients admitted to our institution with a diagnosis of BCS and focal lesions on MRI from 2000 to 2016. MRI images were reviewed by 2 radiologists blinded to the nature of the lesions. Patient and lesion characteristics were recorded, with a focus on washout on portal venous and/or delayed phases. Lesions were compared using Chi-square, Fisher's, Student's t or Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS A total of 49 patients (mean age 35 ± 12 years; 34 women [69%] and 15 men [31%]) with 241 benign lesions and 12 HCC lesions were analyzed. Patients with HCC were significantly older (mean age 44 ± 16 vs. 33 ± 9 years, p = 0.005), with higher alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels (median 16 vs. 3 ng/ml, p = 0.007). Washout was depicted in 9/12 (75%) HCC, and 69/241 (29%) benign lesions (p <0.001). A total of 52/143 (36%) lesions ≥1 cm with arterial hyperenhancement showed washout (9 HCC and 43 benign lesions). In this subgroup, the specificity of washout for the diagnosis of HCC was 67%. Adding T1-w hypointensity raised the specificity to 100%. A serum AFP >15 ng/ml was associated with 95% specificity. CONCLUSION Washout was observed in close to one-third of benign lesions, leading to an unacceptably low specificity for the diagnosis of HCC. The non-invasive diagnostic criteria proposed for cirrhotic patients cannot be extrapolated to patients with BCS. LAY SUMMARY Washout on MRI is depicted in a significant proportion of benign nodules in patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS), limiting its value for the differentiation between benign and malignant lesions. Criteria proposed for the non-invasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis cannot be extrapolated to patients with BCS. Additional imaging findings and patient characteristics, including alpha-fetoprotein serum level, can help determine the probability of a nodule being HCC in patients with BCS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morgane Van Wettere
- Department of Radiology, APHP, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val de Seine, Beaujon, Clichy, France
| | - Yvonne Purcell
- Department of Radiology, APHP, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val de Seine, Beaujon, Clichy, France
| | - Onorina Bruno
- Department of Radiology, APHP, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val de Seine, Beaujon, Clichy, France
| | - Audrey Payancé
- Department of Hepatology, APHP, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val de Seine, Beaujon, Clichy, France; University Paris Diderot. Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France
| | - Aurélie Plessier
- Department of Hepatology, APHP, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val de Seine, Beaujon, Clichy, France; University Paris Diderot. Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France
| | - Pierre-Emmanuel Rautou
- Department of Hepatology, APHP, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val de Seine, Beaujon, Clichy, France; University Paris Diderot. Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France; Inserm, U970, Paris Cardiovascular Research Center - PARCC, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France; DHU Unity, Pôle des Maladies de l'Appareil Digestif, Service d'Hépatologie, Centre de Référence des Maladies Vasculaires du Foie, Hôpital Beaujon, AP-HP, Clichy, France
| | - Dominique Cazals-Hatem
- Department of Pathology, APHP, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val de Seine, Beaujon, Clichy, France
| | - Dominique Valla
- Department of Hepatology, APHP, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val de Seine, Beaujon, Clichy, France; University Paris Diderot. Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France; DHU Unity, Pôle des Maladies de l'Appareil Digestif, Service d'Hépatologie, Centre de Référence des Maladies Vasculaires du Foie, Hôpital Beaujon, AP-HP, Clichy, France
| | - Valérie Vilgrain
- Department of Radiology, APHP, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val de Seine, Beaujon, Clichy, France; University Paris Diderot. Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France; INSERM U1149, CRI, Paris, France
| | - Maxime Ronot
- Department of Radiology, APHP, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val de Seine, Beaujon, Clichy, France; University Paris Diderot. Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France; INSERM U1149, CRI, Paris, France.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Elsayes KM, Kielar AZ, Chernyak V, Morshid A, Furlan A, Masch WR, Marks RM, Kamaya A, Do RKG, Kono Y, Fowler KJ, Tang A, Bashir MR, Hecht EM, Jambhekar K, Lyshchik A, Rodgers SK, Heiken JP, Kohli M, Fetzer DT, Wilson SR, Kassam Z, Mendiratta-Lala M, Singal AG, Lim CS, Cruite I, Lee J, Ash R, Mitchell DG, McInnes MDF, Sirlin CB. LI-RADS: a conceptual and historical review from its beginning to its recent integration into AASLD clinical practice guidance. J Hepatocell Carcinoma 2019; 6:49-69. [PMID: 30788336 PMCID: PMC6368120 DOI: 10.2147/jhc.s186239] [Citation(s) in RCA: 82] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
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 observations in individuals at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). LI-RADS is supported and endorsed by the American College of Radiology (ACR). Upon its initial release in 2011, LI-RADS applied only to liver observations identified at CT or MRI. It has since been refined and expanded over multiple updates to now also address ultrasound-based surveillance, contrast-enhanced ultrasound for HCC diagnosis, and CT/MRI for assessing treatment response after locoregional therapy. The LI-RADS 2018 version was integrated into the HCC diagnosis, staging, and management practice guidance of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD). This article reviews the major LI-RADS updates since its 2011 inception and provides an overview of the currently published LI-RADS algorithms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Khaled M Elsayes
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA,
| | - Ania Z Kielar
- Department of Radiology, University of Toronto, ON, Canada
| | | | - Ali Morshid
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA,
| | - Alessandro Furlan
- Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - William R Masch
- Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Robert M Marks
- Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Aya Kamaya
- Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - Richard K G Do
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Yuko Kono
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Kathryn J Fowler
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Diego, CA, USA
| | - An Tang
- Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Mustafa R Bashir
- Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, and Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Elizabeth M Hecht
- Department of Radiology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
| | - Kedar Jambhekar
- Department of Radiology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA
| | - Andrej Lyshchik
- Department of Radiology, Einstein Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Shuchi K Rodgers
- Department of Radiology, Einstein Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Jay P Heiken
- Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Marc Kohli
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - David T Fetzer
- Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | | | - Zahra Kassam
- Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Schulich School of Medicine, London, ON, Canada
| | | | - Amit G Singal
- Division of Digestive and Liver Diseases, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Christopher S Lim
- Department of Medical Imaging, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Irene Cruite
- Department of Radiology, Inland Imaging, Spokane, WA, USA
| | - James Lee
- Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
| | - Ryan Ash
- Department of Radiology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS, USA
| | - Donald G Mitchell
- Department of Radiology, Einstein Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | | | - Claude B Sirlin
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Diego, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Krishan S, Dhiman RK, Kalra N, Sharma R, Baijal SS, Arora A, Gulati A, Eapan A, Verma A, Keshava S, Mukund A, Deva S, Chaudhary R, Ganesan K, Taneja S, Gorsi U, Gamanagatti S, Madhusudan KS, Puri P, Shalimar, Govil S, Wadhavan M, Saigal S, Kumar A, Thapar S, Duseja A, Saraf N, Khandelwal A, Mukhopadyay S, Gulati A, Shetty N, Verma N. Joint Consensus Statement of the Indian National Association for Study of the Liver and Indian Radiological and Imaging Association for the Diagnosis and Imaging of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Incorporating Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System. J Clin Exp Hepatol 2019; 9:625-651. [PMID: 31695253 PMCID: PMC6823668 DOI: 10.1016/j.jceh.2019.07.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2019] [Accepted: 07/12/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the 6th most common cancer and the second most common cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. There are currently no universally accepted practice guidelines for the diagnosis of HCC on imaging owing to the regional differences in epidemiology, target population, diagnostic imaging modalities, and staging and transplant eligibility. Currently available regional and national guidelines include those from the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease (AASLD), the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL), the Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver, the Japan Society of Hepatology, the Korean Liver Cancer Study Group, Hong Kong, and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network in the United States. India with its large population and a diverse health infrastructure faces challenges unique to its population in diagnosing HCC. Recently, American Association have introduced a Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LIRADS, version 2017, 2018) as an attempt to standardize the acquisition, interpretation, and reporting of liver lesions on imaging and hence improve the coherence between radiologists and clinicians and provide guidance for the management of HCC. The aim of the present consensus was to find a common ground in reporting and interpreting liver lesions pertaining to HCC on imaging keeping LIRADSv2018 in mind.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sonal Krishan
- Department of Radiology, Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon, India
| | - Radha K. Dhiman
- Department of Hepatology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India,Address for correspondence: Radha Krishan Dhiman, MD, DM, FACG, FRCP, FAASLD, Department of Hepatology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
| | - Navin Kalra
- Department of Radiology, Postgraduate Institute Of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| | - Raju Sharma
- Department of Radiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | - Sanjay S. Baijal
- Department of Diagnostic and Intervention Radiology, Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon, India
| | - Anil Arora
- Institute Of Liver Gastroenterology & Pancreatico Biliary Sciences, Sir Gangaram Hospital, New Delhi, India
| | - Ajay Gulati
- Department of Hepatology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| | - Anu Eapan
- Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India
| | - Ashish Verma
- Department of Radiology, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India
| | - Shyam Keshava
- Department of Radiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India
| | - Amar Mukund
- Department of Intervention Radiology, Institute of liver and biliary Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | - S. Deva
- Department of Radiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | - Ravi Chaudhary
- Department of Radiology, Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon, India
| | | | - Sunil Taneja
- Department of Hepatology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| | - Ujjwal Gorsi
- Department of Radiology, Postgraduate Institute Of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| | | | - Kumble S. Madhusudan
- Department of Radiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | - Pankaj Puri
- Institute Of Liver Gastroenterology & Pancreatico Biliary Sciences, Sir Gangaram Hospital, New Delhi, India
| | - Shalimar
- Department of GastroEnterology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | | | - Manav Wadhavan
- Institute of Digestive and Liver Diseases, BLK Hospital, Delhi, India
| | - Sanjiv Saigal
- Department of Hepatology, Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon, India
| | - Ashish Kumar
- Institute Of Liver Gastroenterology & Pancreatico Biliary Sciences, Sir Gangaram Hospital, New Delhi, India
| | - Shallini Thapar
- Department of Radiology, Institute of liver and biliary Sciences, New Delhi, India
| | - Ajay Duseja
- Department of Hepatology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| | - Neeraj Saraf
- Department of Hepatology, Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon, India
| | | | | | - Ajay Gulati
- Department of Radiology, Postgraduate Institute Of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| | - Nitin Shetty
- Department of Radiology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Kolkata, India
| | - Nipun Verma
- Department of Hepatology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Pfeiffer D, Parakh A, Patino M, Kambadakone A, Rummeny EJ, Sahani DV. Iodine material density images in dual-energy CT: quantification of contrast uptake and washout in HCC. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2018; 43:3317-3323. [PMID: 29774382 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-018-1636-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To determine the diagnostic potential of Material Density (MD) iodine images in dual-energy CT (DECT) for visualization and quantification of arterial phase hyperenhancement and washout in hepatocellular carcinomas compared to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS The study complied with HIPAA guidelines and was approved by the ethics committee of the institutional review board. Thirty-one patients (23 men, 8 women; age range, 36-87 years) with known or suspected Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) were included. All of them underwent both single-source DECT and MRI within less than 3 months. Late arterial phase and portal venous phase CT imaging was performed with dual energies of 140 and 80 kVp, and virtual monoenergetic images (at 65 keV) and MD-iodine images were generated. We determined the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) for HCC in arterial phase and portal venous phase images. In addition, we introduced a new parameter which combines information of CNR in arterial and portal venous phase images into a single ratio (combined CNR). All parameters were assessed on monoenergetic 65 keV images, MD-iodine images, and MRI. Paired t test was used to compare CNR values in Mono-65 keV, MD-iodine, and MR images. RESULTS CNR was significantly higher in the MD-iodine images in both the arterial (81.87 ± 40.42) and the portal venous phases (33.31 ± 27.86), compared to the Mono-65 keV (6.34 ± 4.23 and 1.89 ± 1.87) and MRI (30.48 ± 25.52 and 8.27 ± 8.36), respectively. Combined CNR assessment from arterial and portal venous phase showed higher contrast ratios for all imaging modalities (Mono-65 keV, 8.73 ± 4.03; MD-iodine, 119.87 ± 52.94; MRI, 34.87 ± 27.34). In addition, highest contrast ratio was achieved in MD-iodine images with combined CNR evaluation (119.87 ± 52.94, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION MD-iodine images in DECT allow for a quantitative assessment of contrast enhancement and washout, with improved CNR in hepatocellular carcinoma in comparison to MRI.
Collapse
|
27
|
Elsayes KM, Hooker JC, Agrons MM, Kielar AZ, Tang A, Fowler KJ, Chernyak V, Bashir MR, Kono Y, Do RK, Mitchell DG, Kamaya A, Hecht EM, Sirlin CB. 2017 Version of LI-RADS for CT and MR Imaging: An Update. Radiographics 2018; 37:1994-2017. [PMID: 29131761 DOI: 10.1148/rg.2017170098] [Citation(s) in RCA: 171] [Impact Index Per Article: 28.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is a reporting system created for the standardized interpretation of liver imaging findings in patients who are at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This system was developed with the cooperative and ongoing efforts of an American College of Radiology-supported committee of diagnostic radiologists with expertise in liver imaging and valuable input from hepatobiliary surgeons, hepatologists, hepatopathologists, and interventional radiologists. In this article, the 2017 version of LI-RADS for computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging is reviewed. Specific topics include the appropriate population for application of LI-RADS; technical recommendations for image optimization, including definitions of dynamic enhancement phases; diagnostic and treatment response categories; definitions of major and ancillary imaging features; criteria for distinguishing definite HCC from a malignancy that might be non-HCC; management options following LI-RADS categorization; and reporting. ©RSNA, 2017.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Khaled M Elsayes
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| | - Jonathan C Hooker
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| | - Michelle M Agrons
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| | - Ania Z Kielar
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| | - An Tang
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| | - Kathryn J Fowler
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| | - Victoria Chernyak
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| | - Mustafa R Bashir
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| | - Yuko Kono
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| | - Richard K Do
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| | - Donald G Mitchell
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| | - Aya Kamaya
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| | - Elizabeth M Hecht
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| | - Claude B Sirlin
- From the Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler St, Houston, TX 77030 (K.M.E.); Liver Imaging Group, Department of Diagnostic Radiology (J.C.H., C.B.S.), and Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Y.K.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (M.M.A.); Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (A.Z.K.); Department of Radiology, Radio-Oncology and Nuclear Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (A.T.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY (V.C.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.D.); Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, Calif (A.K.); and Department of Radiology, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY (E.M.H.)
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Kielar AZ, Chernyak V, Bashir MR, Do RK, Fowler KJ, Mitchell DG, Cerny M, Elsayes KM, Santillan C, Kamaya A, Kono Y, Sirlin CB, Tang A. LI-RADS 2017: An update. J Magn Reson Imaging 2018; 47:1459-1474. [PMID: 29626376 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.26027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/05/2018] [Accepted: 03/08/2018] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
The computed tomography / magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) Liver Imaging Reporting & Data System (LI-RADS) is a standardized system for diagnostic imaging terminology, technique, interpretation, and reporting in patients with or at risk for developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Using diagnostic algorithms and tables, the system assigns to liver observations category codes reflecting the relative probability of HCC or other malignancies. This review article provides an overview of the 2017 version of CT/MRI LI-RADS with a focus on MRI. The main LI-RADS categories and their application will be described. Changes and updates introduced in this version of LI-RADS will be highlighted, including modifications to the diagnostic algorithm and to the optional application of ancillary features. Comparisons to other major diagnostic systems for HCC will be made, emphasizing key similarities, differences, strengths, and limitations. In addition, this review presents the new Treatment Response algorithm, while introducing the concepts of MRI nonviability and viability. Finally, planned future directions for LI-RADS will be outlined. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 5 Technical Efficacy: Stage 5 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:1459-1474.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ania Z Kielar
- Royal Victoria Regional Health Center, Barrie, Ontario, University of Ottawa, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Victoria Chernyak
- Department of Radiology, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA
| | - Mustafa R Bashir
- Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Richard K Do
- Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Kathryn J Fowler
- Department of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Donald G Mitchell
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Milena Cerny
- Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Montréal, Québec, Canada
| | - Khaled M Elsayes
- Department of Radiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Huston, Texas, USA
| | - Cynthia Santillan
- Department of Radiology, University of California, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Aya Kamaya
- Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, USA
| | - Yuko Kono
- Department of gastroenterology, University of California, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Claude B Sirlin
- Department of Radiology, University of California, San Diego, California, USA
| | - An Tang
- Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Montréal, Québec, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Kambadakone AR, Fung A, Gupta RT, Hope TA, Fowler KJ, Lyshchik A, Ganesan K, Yaghmai V, Guimaraes AR, Sahani DV, Miller FH. LI-RADS technical requirements for CT, MRI, and contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2018; 43:56-74. [PMID: 28940042 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-017-1325-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 53] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
Accurate detection and characterization of liver observations to enable HCC diagnosis and staging using LI-RADS requires a technically adequate imaging exam. To help achieve this objective, LI-RADS has proposed technical requirements for CT, MR, and contrast-enhanced ultrasound of liver. This article reviews the technical requirements for liver imaging, including the description of minimum acceptable technical standards, such as the scanner hardware requirements, recommended dynamic imaging phases, and common technical challenges of liver imaging.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Avinash R Kambadakone
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, White 270, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
| | - Alice Fung
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Rajan T Gupta
- Department of Radiology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
| | - Thomas A Hope
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Kathryn J Fowler
- Department of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA
| | - Andrej Lyshchik
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Karthik Ganesan
- Department of Radiology, Sir HN Reliance Foundation Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai, India
| | - Vahid Yaghmai
- Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Alexander R Guimaraes
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Dushyant V Sahani
- Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, White 270, Boston, MA, 02114, USA
| | - Frank H Miller
- Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Tang A, Bashir MR, Corwin MT, Cruite I, Dietrich CF, Do RKG, Ehman EC, Fowler KJ, Hussain HK, Jha RC, Karam AR, Mamidipalli A, Marks RM, Mitchell DG, Morgan TA, Ohliger MA, Shah A, Vu KN, Sirlin CB. Evidence Supporting LI-RADS Major Features for CT- and MR Imaging-based Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review. Radiology 2018; 286:29-48. [PMID: 29166245 PMCID: PMC6677284 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2017170554] [Citation(s) in RCA: 210] [Impact Index Per Article: 35.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) standardizes the interpretation, reporting, and data collection for imaging examinations in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). It assigns category codes reflecting relative probability of HCC to imaging-detected liver observations based on major and ancillary imaging features. LI-RADS also includes imaging features suggesting malignancy other than HCC. Supported and endorsed by the American College of Radiology (ACR), the system has been developed by a committee of radiologists, hepatologists, pathologists, surgeons, lexicon experts, and ACR staff, with input from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the Organ Procurement Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing. Development of LI-RADS has been based on literature review, expert opinion, rounds of testing and iteration, and feedback from users. This article summarizes and assesses the quality of evidence supporting each LI-RADS major feature for diagnosis of HCC, as well as of the LI-RADS imaging features suggesting malignancy other than HCC. Based on the evidence, recommendations are provided for or against their continued inclusion in LI-RADS. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- An Tang
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Mustafa R. Bashir
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Michael T. Corwin
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Irene Cruite
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Christoph F. Dietrich
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Richard K. G. Do
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Eric C. Ehman
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Kathryn J. Fowler
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Hero K. Hussain
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Reena C. Jha
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | | | - Adrija Mamidipalli
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Robert M. Marks
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Donald G. Mitchell
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Tara A. Morgan
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Michael A. Ohliger
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Amol Shah
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Kim-Nhien Vu
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - Claude B. Sirlin
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| | - For the LI-RADS Evidence Working Group
- From the Department of Radiology, Université de Montréal, 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, Canada H2X 0C2 (A.T., K.N.V.); Department of Radiology and Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Department of Radiology, Davis Medical Center, University of California, Sacramento, Calif (M.T.C.); Inland Imaging, Spokane, Wash (I.C.); Caritas-Krankenhaus, Medizinische Klinik 2, Bad Mergentheim, Germany (C.F.D.); Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (R.K.G.D.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (E.C.E.); Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (K.J.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon (H.K.H.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Mass (A.R.K.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group, University of California San Diego, Calif (A.M., C.B.S.); Department of Radiology, Naval Medical Center San Diego, San Diego, Calif (R.M.M.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (T.A.M., M.A.O.); Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O.); and Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa (A.S.)
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Santillan C, Fowler K, Kono Y, Chernyak V. LI-RADS major features: CT, MRI with extracellular agents, and MRI with hepatobiliary agents. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2018; 43:75-81. [PMID: 28828680 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-017-1291-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) was designed to standardize the interpretation and reporting of observations seen on studies performed in patients at risk for development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The LI-RADS algorithm guides radiologists through the process of categorizing observations on a spectrum from definitely benign to definitely HCC. Major features are the imaging features used to categorize observations as LI-RADS 3 (intermediate probability of malignancy), LIRADS 4 (probably HCC), and LI-RADS 5 (definite HCC). Major features include arterial phase hyperenhancement, washout appearance, enhancing capsule appearance, size, and threshold growth. Observations that have few major criteria are assigned lower categories than those that have several, with the goal of preserving high specificity for the LR-5 category of Definite HCC. The goal of this paper is to discuss LI-RADS major features, including definitions, rationale for selection as major features, and imaging examples.
Collapse
|
32
|
Fowler KJ, Tang A, Santillan C, Bhargavan-Chatfield M, Heiken J, Jha RC, Weinreb J, Hussain H, Mitchell DG, Bashir MR, Costa EAC, Cunha GM, Coombs L, Wolfson T, Gamst AC, Brancatelli G, Yeh B, Sirlin CB. Interreader Reliability of LI-RADS Version 2014 Algorithm and Imaging Features for Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Large International Multireader Study. Radiology 2017; 286:173-185. [PMID: 29091751 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2017170376] [Citation(s) in RCA: 79] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Purpose To determine in a large multicenter multireader setting the interreader reliability of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2014 categories, the major imaging features seen with computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and the potential effect of reader demographics on agreement with a preselected nonconsecutive image set. Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained, and patient consent was waived for this retrospective study. Ten image sets, comprising 38-40 unique studies (equal number of CT and MR imaging studies, uniformly distributed LI-RADS categories), were randomly allocated to readers. Images were acquired in unenhanced and standard contrast material-enhanced phases, with observation diameter and growth data provided. Readers completed a demographic survey, assigned LI-RADS version 2014 categories, and assessed major features. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) assessed with mixed-model regression analyses was the metric for interreader reliability of assigning categories and major features. Results A total of 113 readers evaluated 380 image sets. ICC of final LI-RADS category assignment was 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61, 0.71) for CT and 0.73 (95% CI: 0.68, 0.77) for MR imaging. ICC was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.84, 0.90) for arterial phase hyperenhancement, 0.85 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.88) for washout appearance, and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.80, 0.87) for capsule appearance. ICC was not significantly affected by liver expertise, LI-RADS familiarity, or years of postresidency practice (ICC range, 0.69-0.70; ICC difference, 0.003-0.01 [95% CI: -0.003 to -0.01, 0.004-0.02]. ICC was borderline higher for private practice readers than for academic readers (ICC difference, 0.009; 95% CI: 0.000, 0.021). Conclusion ICC is good for final LI-RADS categorization and high for major feature characterization, with minimal reader demographic effect. Of note, our results using selected image sets from nonconsecutive examinations are not necessarily comparable with those of prior studies that used consecutive examination series. © RSNA, 2017.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathryn J Fowler
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - An Tang
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Cynthia Santillan
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Mythreyi Bhargavan-Chatfield
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Jay Heiken
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Reena C Jha
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Jeffrey Weinreb
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Hero Hussain
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Donald G Mitchell
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Mustafa R Bashir
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Eduardo A C Costa
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Guilherme M Cunha
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Laura Coombs
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Tanya Wolfson
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Anthony C Gamst
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Giuseppe Brancatelli
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Benjamin Yeh
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| | - Claude B Sirlin
- From the Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, 510 S Kingshighway Blvd, St Louis, MO 63110 (K.J.F., J.H.); Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal, Canada (A.T.); Department of Radiology, Liver Imaging Group (C.S., C.B.S.), and Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, San Diego Supercomputer Center (T.W., A.C.G.), University of California San Diego, San Diego, Calif; American College of Radiology, Reston, Va (M.B., L.C.); Department of Radiology, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC (R.C.J.); Department of Radiology, Yale Medical School, New Haven, Conn (J.W.); Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich (H.H.); Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pa (D.G.M.); Department of Radiology, Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (M.R.B.); Cedrul, CT and MRI, Joao Pessoa, Brazil (E.A.C.C.); Clinica de Diagnostico por Imagem-CDPI-DASA, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (G.M.C.); Division of Radiological Science, Di.Bi.Med., University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy (G.B.); and Department of Radiology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (B.Y.)
| |
Collapse
|
33
|
Value of the portal venous phase in evaluation of treated hepatocellular carcinoma following transcatheter arterial chemoembolisation. Clin Radiol 2017; 72:994.e9-994.e16. [PMID: 28779950 DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2017.07.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2016] [Revised: 05/22/2017] [Accepted: 07/03/2017] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
AIM To evaluate the utility of the portal venous phase on multiphasic computed tomography (CT) after treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with trans-arterial chemoembolisation (TACE). MATERIALS AND METHODS This was a retrospective review of patients who underwent TACE for HCC between 1 April 2012 and 21 December 2014, with appropriate multiphasic, pre- and post-procedural CT examinations. The maximum non-contrast, arterial phase, and portal venous phase attenuation values of the tumour and tumour bed were evaluated within a region of interest (ROI), with values adjusted against background hepatic parenchyma. Linear regression analyses were performed for both the arterial and venous phases, to assess the level of enhancement and to determine if the venous phase had additional value in this setting. RESULTS A total of 86 cases from 51 patients were reviewed. All pre-procedural CT examinations of lesions demonstrated arterial phase enhancement with portal venous and delayed phase washout compatible with HCC. The post-procedural CT examinations following TACE revealed expected decreased arterial enhancement. Sixty-five cases (76%) showed persistent non-enhancement on the portal venous phase following embolisation therapy. A total of 21 cases (24%), however, demonstrated progressive portal venous hyper enhancement. Linear regression analysis demonstrated a statistical significance between the difference in maximal arterial and portal venous enhancement in these cases. CONCLUSION Following TACE, the treated lesion may demonstrate portal venous phase hyper-enhancement within the tumour bed. As such, full attention should be given to these images for comprehensive evaluation of tumour response following treatment.
Collapse
|
34
|
Kim Y, Furlan A, Borhani AA, Bae KT. Computer-aided diagnosis program for classifying the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma on MR images following liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS). J Magn Reson Imaging 2017; 47:710-722. [PMID: 28556283 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.25772] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2016] [Accepted: 05/08/2017] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To develop and evaluate a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) program for liver lesions on magnetic resonance (MR) images for classification of the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following the liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS). MATERIALS AND METHODS Liver MR images from 41 patients with hyperenhancing liver lesions categorized as LR 3, 4, and 5 were evaluated by two radiologists. The major LI-RADS features of each index liver lesion were recorded, including size (maximum transverse diameter), presence of hyperenhancement, washout appearance, and capsule appearance. A CAD program was implemented to register MR images at different contrast-enhancement phases, segment liver lesions, extract lesion features, and classify lesions according to LI-RADS. The LI-RADS features quantified by CAD were compared with those assessed by radiologists using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and receiver operator curve (ROC) analyses. The LI-RADS categorization between CAD and radiologists was evaluated using the weighted Cohen's kappa coefficient. RESULTS The mean and standard deviation of the lesion diameters were 21 ± 11 mm (range, 7-70 mm) by radiologists and 22 ± 11 mm (range, 8-72 mm) by CAD (ICC, 0.96-0.97). The area under the curve (AUC) for the washout assessment by CAD was 0.79-0.93 with sensitivity 0.69-0.82 and specificity 0.79-1. The AUC for the capsule assessment by CAD was 0.79-0.9 with sensitivity 0.75-0.9 and specificity 0.82-0.96. The classifications by the radiologists and CAD coincided in 76-83% lesions (k = 0.57-0.71), while the agreements between radiologists were in 78% lesions (k = 0.59). CONCLUSION We developed a CAD program for liver lesions on MR images and showed a substantial agreement in the LI-RADS-based classification of the risk of HCCs between the CAD and radiologists. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:710-722.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Youngwoo Kim
- Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Alessandro Furlan
- Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Amir A Borhani
- Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Kyongtae T Bae
- Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Ramalho M, Matos AP, AlObaidy M, Velloni F, Altun E, Semelka RC. Magnetic resonance imaging of the cirrhotic liver: diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma and evaluation of response to treatment - Part 1. Radiol Bras 2017; 50:38-47. [PMID: 28298731 PMCID: PMC5347502 DOI: 10.1590/0100-3984.2015.0132] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the modern gold standard for the noninvasive evaluation of the cirrhotic liver. The combination of arterial phase hyperenhancement and delayed wash-out allows a definitive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with liver cirrhosis or chronic liver disease, without the requirement for confirmatory biopsy. That pattern is highly specific and has been endorsed in Western and Asian diagnostic guidelines. However, the sensitivity of the combination is relatively low for small HCCs. In this two-part review paper, we will address MRI of the cirrhotic liver. In this first part, we provide a brief background on liver cirrhosis and HCC, followed by descriptions of imaging surveillance of liver cirrhosis and the diagnostic performance of the different imaging modalities used in clinical settings. We then describe some of the requirements for the basic MRI technique, as well as the standard MRI protocol, and provide a detailed description of the appearance of various types of hepatocellular nodules encountered in the setting of the carcinogenic pathway in the cirrhotic liver, ranging from regenerative nodules to HCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miguel Ramalho
- Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, and Hospital Garcia de Orta, Almada, Portugal
| | - António P Matos
- Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, and Hospital Garcia de Orta, Almada, Portugal
| | - Mamdoh AlObaidy
- Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, and King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Fernanda Velloni
- Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Ersan Altun
- Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Richard C Semelka
- Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Kloeckner R, Pinto Dos Santos D, Kreitner KF, Leicher-Düber A, Weinmann A, Mittler J, Düber C. Quantitative assessment of washout in hepatocellular carcinoma using MRI. BMC Cancer 2016; 16:758. [PMID: 27681525 PMCID: PMC5041582 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-016-2797-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2016] [Accepted: 09/16/2016] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Arterial hyperenhancement and washout on computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are described by all major guidelines as specific criteria for non-invasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, publications on the quantitative assessment of washout in MRI are lacking. Therefore, we evaluated a method for quantitatively measuring and defining washout in MRI in order to determine a cutoff value that allows objective HCC diagnosis. Methods We analyzed all patients who underwent liver transplantation for cirrhosis or liver resection for HCC at our institution between 2003 and 2014. Washout was quantitatively investigated by placing a 25-mm2 region of interest (ROI) over each nodule and two 25-mm2 ROIs over adjacent liver parenchyma. The percentage signal ratio (PSR = 100 × ratio of signal intensity of adjacent liver to that of the lesion) was calculated for each series in both groups. Accordingly, this quantitative measurement was compared to a qualitative approach. Results A total of 16 hypervascularized non-HCC nodules and 69 HCC nodules were identified. Interobserver reliability was reasonably good for the measurement of PSRs and readers showed a substantial agreement for the qualitative assessment. In the HCC group, the median PSR was 116.2 at equilibrium and 112.9 in the delayed phase. In the non-HCC group, the median PSR was 93.8 at equilibrium and 96.0 in the delayed phase. Receiver operating characteristic analysis indicated areas under the curve of 0.902 (p < 0.001) and 0.873 (p < 0.001) at equilibrium and in the delayed phase. PSR values of 102 at equilibrium and 101.5 in the delayed phase led to the highest Youden’s index of 0.82 and 0.77, respectively. These PSR cutoffs yielded sensitivities of 82 and 77 %, respectively, with specificities of 100 %. The sensitivity for the qualitative assessment of washout was 88 and 93 % and the specificity was 48 and 56 %. For the classification of HCC, sensitivity yielded 95 and 97 % and specificity was 68 and 56 %, respectively. Conclusion Quantitatively measuring HCC washout in MRI is easy and reproducible. It can objectify and support diagnosis of HCC. However, the quantitative measurement of washout can only serve as one of several components of HCC assessment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roman Kloeckner
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Johannes Gutenberg-University Medical Centre, Langenbeckst.1, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
| | - Daniel Pinto Dos Santos
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Johannes Gutenberg-University Medical Centre, Langenbeckst.1, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| | - Karl-Friedrich Kreitner
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Johannes Gutenberg-University Medical Centre, Langenbeckst.1, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| | - Anne Leicher-Düber
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Johannes Gutenberg-University Medical Centre, Langenbeckst.1, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| | - Arndt Weinmann
- Department of Internal Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg-University Medical Centre, Langenbeckst.1, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| | - Jens Mittler
- Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Johannes Gutenberg-University Medical Centre, Langenbeckst.1, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| | - Christoph Düber
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Johannes Gutenberg-University Medical Centre, Langenbeckst.1, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Boas FE, Kamaya A, Do B, Desser TS, Beaulieu CF, Vasanawala SS, Hwang GL, Sze DY. Classification of hypervascular liver lesions based on hepatic artery and portal vein blood supply coefficients calculated from triphasic CT scans. J Digit Imaging 2016; 28:213-23. [PMID: 25183580 DOI: 10.1007/s10278-014-9725-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Perfusion CT of the liver typically involves scanning the liver at least 20 times, resulting in a large radiation dose. We developed and validated a simplified model of tumor blood supply that can be applied to standard triphasic scans and evaluated whether this can be used to distinguish benign and malignant liver lesions. Triphasic CTs of 46 malignant and 32 benign liver lesions were analyzed. For each phase, regions of interest were drawn in the arterially enhancing portion of each lesion, as well as the background liver, aorta, and portal vein. Hepatic artery and portal vein blood supply coefficients for each lesion were then calculated by expressing the enhancement curve of the lesion as a linear combination of the enhancement curves of the aorta and portal vein. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and hypervascular metastases, on average, both had increased hepatic artery coefficients compared to the background liver. Compared to HCC, benign lesions, on average, had either a greater hepatic artery coefficient (hemangioma) or a greater portal vein coefficient (focal nodular hyperplasia or transient hepatic attenuation difference). Hypervascularity with washout is a key diagnostic criterion for HCC, but it had a sensitivity of 72 % and specificity of 81 % for diagnosing malignancy in our diverse set of liver lesions. The sensitivity for malignancy was increased to 89 % by including enhancing lesions that were hypodense on all phases. The specificity for malignancy was increased to 97 % (p = 0.039) by also examining hepatic artery and portal vein blood supply coefficients, while maintaining a sensitivity of 76 %.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Edward Boas
- Interventional Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY, 10065, USA,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
38
|
Kitzing YX, Ng BHK, Kitzing B, Waugh R, Kench JG, Strasser SI, McCormack S. Washout of hepatocellular carcinoma on portal venous phase of multidetector computed tomography in a pre-transplant population. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2015; 59:673-80. [DOI: 10.1111/1754-9485.12347] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2015] [Accepted: 06/21/2015] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Yu Xuan Kitzing
- Department of Radiology; Royal Prince Alfred Hospital; Sydney New South Wales Australia
| | - Bernard HK Ng
- Department of Radiology; Royal Prince Alfred Hospital; Sydney New South Wales Australia
| | - Bjoern Kitzing
- Department of Radiology; Royal Prince Alfred Hospital; Sydney New South Wales Australia
| | - Richard Waugh
- Department of Radiology; Royal Prince Alfred Hospital; Sydney New South Wales Australia
| | - James G Kench
- Department of Tissue Pathology and Diagnostic Oncology; Royal Prince Alfred Hospital; Sydney New South Wales Australia
| | - Simone I Strasser
- AW Morrow Gastroenterology and Liver Centre; Royal Prince Alfred Hospital; Sydney New South Wales Australia
| | - Samuel McCormack
- Department of Radiology; Royal Prince Alfred Hospital; Sydney New South Wales Australia
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Wang SB, Wu HB, Wang QS, Zhou WL, Tian Y, Li HS, Ji YH, Lv L. Combined early dynamic (18)F-FDG PET/CT and conventional whole-body (18)F-FDG PET/CT provide one-stop imaging for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol 2015; 39:324-30. [PMID: 25487755 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinre.2014.10.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2014] [Revised: 10/12/2014] [Accepted: 10/21/2014] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE It is widely accepted that conventional (18)F-FDG PET/CT (whole-body static (18)F-FDG PET/CT, WB (18)F-FDG PET/CT) has a low detection rate for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We prospectively assessed the role of early dynamic (18)F-FDG PET/CT (ED (18)F-FDG PET/CT) and WB (18)F-FDG PET/CT in detecting HCC, and we quantified the added value of ED (18)F-FDG PET/CT to WB (18)F-FDG PET/CT. METHODS Twenty-two patients with 37 HCC tumors (HCCs) who underwent both a liver ED (18)F-FDG PET/CT (performed simultaneously with a 5.5 MBq/kg (18)F-FDG bolus injection and continued for 240 s) and a WB (18)F-FDG PET/CT were enrolled in the study. RESULTS The WB (18)F-FDG PET/CT and ED (18)F-FDG PET/CT scans were positive in 56.7% (21/37) and 78.4% (29/37) HCCs, respectively (P<0.05). ED (18)F-FDG PET/CT in conjunction with WB (18)F-FDG PET/CT (one-stop (18)F-FDG PET/CT) improved the positive detection rates of WB and ED (18)F-FDG PET/CT alone from 56.7% and 78.4% to 91.9% (34/37) (P<0.001 and P>0.05, respectively). CONCLUSION One-stop (18)F-FDG PET/CT appears to be useful to improve WB (18)F-FDG PET/CT for HCC detection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shao-Bo Wang
- NanFang PET Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China; Department of Radiology, First People's Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, China.
| | - Hu-Bing Wu
- NanFang PET Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Quan-Shi Wang
- NanFang PET Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
| | - Wen-Lan Zhou
- NanFang PET Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Ying Tian
- NanFang PET Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Hong-Sheng Li
- NanFang PET Center, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Yun-Hai Ji
- Department of Radiology, First People's Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, China
| | - Liang Lv
- Department of Radiology, First People's Hospital of Yunnan Province, Kunming, China
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Chou R, Cuevas C, Fu R, Devine B, Wasson N, Ginsburg A, Zakher B, Pappas M, Graham E, Sullivan SD. Imaging Techniques for the Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2015; 162:697-711. [PMID: 25984845 DOI: 10.7326/m14-2509] [Citation(s) in RCA: 135] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Several imaging modalities are available for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). PURPOSE To evaluate the test performance of imaging modalities for HCC. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE (1998 to December 2014), the Cochrane Library Database, Scopus, and reference lists. STUDY SELECTION Studies on test performance of ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). DATA EXTRACTION One investigator abstracted data, and a second investigator confirmed them; 2 investigators independently assessed study quality and strength of evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS Few studies have evaluated imaging for HCC in surveillance settings. In nonsurveillance settings, sensitivity for detection of HCC lesions was lower for ultrasonography without contrast than for CT or MRI (pooled difference based on direct comparisons, 0.11 to 0.22), and MRI was associated with higher sensitivity than CT (pooled difference, 0.09 [95% CI, 0.07 to 12]). For evaluation of focal liver lesions, there were no clear differences in sensitivity among ultrasonography with contrast, CT, and MRI. Specificity was generally 0.85 or higher across imaging modalities, but this item was not reported in many studies. Factors associated with lower sensitivity included use of an explanted liver reference standard, and smaller or more well-differentiated HCC lesions. For MRI, sensitivity was slightly higher for hepatic-specific than nonspecific contrast agents. LIMITATIONS Only English-language articles were included, there was statistical heterogeneity in pooled analyses, and costs were not assessed. Most studies were conducted in Asia and had methodological limitations. CONCLUSION CT and MRI are associated with higher sensitivity than ultrasonography without contrast for detection of HCC; sensitivity was higher for MRI than CT. For evaluation of focal liver lesions, the sensitivities of ultrasonography with contrast, CT, and MRI for HCC are similar. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. ( PROSPERO CRD42014007016).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Roger Chou
- From Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; University of Washington Centers for Comparative and Health Systems Effectiveness (CHASE) Alliance, Seattle, Washington; and Mayo Medical School, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Carlos Cuevas
- From Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; University of Washington Centers for Comparative and Health Systems Effectiveness (CHASE) Alliance, Seattle, Washington; and Mayo Medical School, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Rongwei Fu
- From Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; University of Washington Centers for Comparative and Health Systems Effectiveness (CHASE) Alliance, Seattle, Washington; and Mayo Medical School, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Beth Devine
- From Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; University of Washington Centers for Comparative and Health Systems Effectiveness (CHASE) Alliance, Seattle, Washington; and Mayo Medical School, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Ngoc Wasson
- From Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; University of Washington Centers for Comparative and Health Systems Effectiveness (CHASE) Alliance, Seattle, Washington; and Mayo Medical School, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Alexander Ginsburg
- From Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; University of Washington Centers for Comparative and Health Systems Effectiveness (CHASE) Alliance, Seattle, Washington; and Mayo Medical School, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Bernadette Zakher
- From Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; University of Washington Centers for Comparative and Health Systems Effectiveness (CHASE) Alliance, Seattle, Washington; and Mayo Medical School, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Miranda Pappas
- From Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; University of Washington Centers for Comparative and Health Systems Effectiveness (CHASE) Alliance, Seattle, Washington; and Mayo Medical School, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Elaine Graham
- From Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; University of Washington Centers for Comparative and Health Systems Effectiveness (CHASE) Alliance, Seattle, Washington; and Mayo Medical School, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Sean D. Sullivan
- From Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; University of Washington Centers for Comparative and Health Systems Effectiveness (CHASE) Alliance, Seattle, Washington; and Mayo Medical School, Rochester, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
JOURNAL CLUB: Prevalence of Flawed Multiple-Choice Questions in Continuing Medical Education Activities of Major Radiology Journals. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 204:698-702. [DOI: 10.2214/ajr.13.11963] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
|
42
|
Huo L, Guo J, Dang Y, Lv J, Zheng Y, Li F, Xie Q, Chen X. Kinetic analysis of dynamic (11)C-acetate PET/CT imaging as a potential method for differentiation of hepatocellular carcinoma and benign liver lesions. Am J Cancer Res 2015; 5:371-7. [PMID: 25699097 PMCID: PMC4329501 DOI: 10.7150/thno.10760] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2014] [Accepted: 12/27/2014] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective: The kinetic analysis of 11C-acetate PET provides more information than routine one time-point static imaging. This study aims to investigate the potential of dynamic 11C-acetate hepatic PET imaging to improve the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and benign liver lesions by using compartmental kinetic modeling and discriminant analysis. Methods: Twenty-two patients were enrolled in this study, 6 cases were with well-differentiated HCCs, 7 with poorly-differentiated HCCs and 9 with benign pathologies. Following the CT scan, all patients underwent 11C-acetate dynamic PET imaging. A three-compartment irreversible dual-input model was applied to the lesion time activity curves (TACs) to estimate the kinetic rate constants K1-k3, vascular fraction (VB) and the coefficient α representing the relative hepatic artery (HA) contribution to the hepatic blood supply on lesions and non-lesion liver tissue. The parameter Ki (=K1×k3/(k2 + k3)) was calculated to evaluate the local hepatic metabolic rate of acetate (LHMAct). The lesions were further classified by discriminant analysis with all the above parameters. Results: K1 and lesion to non-lesion standardized uptake value (SUV) ratio (T/L) were found to be the parameters best characterizing the differences among well-differentiated HCC, poorly-differentiated HCC and benign lesions in stepwise discriminant analysis. With discriminant functions consisting of these two parameters, the accuracy of lesion prediction was 87.5% for well-differentiated HCC, 50% for poorly-differentiated HCC and 66.7% for benign lesions. The classification was much better than that with SUV and T/L, where the corresponding classification accuracy of the three kinds of lesions was 57.1%, 33.3% and 44.4%. Conclusion: 11C-acetate kinetic parameter K1 could improve the identification of HCC from benign lesions in combination with T/L in discriminant analysis. The discriminant analysis using static and kinetic parameters appears to be a very helpful method for clinical liver masses diagnosis and staging.
Collapse
|
43
|
Choi JY, Lee JM, Sirlin CB. CT and MR imaging diagnosis and staging of hepatocellular carcinoma: part II. Extracellular agents, hepatobiliary agents, and ancillary imaging features. Radiology 2015; 273:30-50. [PMID: 25247563 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.14132362] [Citation(s) in RCA: 356] [Impact Index Per Article: 39.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging play critical roles in the diagnosis and staging of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The second article of this two-part review discusses basic concepts of diagnosis and staging, reviews the diagnostic performance of CT and MR imaging with extracellular contrast agents and of MR imaging with hepatobiliary contrast agents, and examines in depth the major and ancillary imaging features used in the diagnosis and characterization of HCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jin-Young Choi
- From the Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University Health System, Seoul, Korea (J.Y.C.); Department of Radiology and Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea (J.M.L.); and Liver Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, University of California-San Diego Medical Center, 408 Dickinson St, San Diego, CA 92103-8226 (C.B.S.)
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
44
|
ALPHA Glycolytic Vasculogenesis Better Correlates With MRI and CT Imaging Techniques Than the Traditional Oxygen Vasculogenesis Theory. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 203:W724-34. [DOI: 10.2214/ajr.13.11762] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
|
45
|
Ronot M, Vilgrain V. Hepatocellular carcinoma: diagnostic criteria by imaging techniques. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2014; 28:795-812. [PMID: 25260309 DOI: 10.1016/j.bpg.2014.08.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2014] [Revised: 07/12/2014] [Accepted: 08/15/2014] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
Imaging plays a very important role in the diagnosis of HCC. Indeed, in high-risk patients a noninvasive diagnosis can only be obtained by imaging in presence of typical features. These features include arterial enhancement followed by washout during the portal venous and/or delayed phases on CT scan or MRI. This pattern is quite specific and has been endorsed by both Western and Asian diagnostic guidelines. However, its sensitivity is not very high, especially for small lesions. Therefore ancillary signs may be needed to increase the reliability of the diagnosis. Recent hepatobiliary MRI contrast agents seem to be interesting to improve characterization of small nodules in the cirrhotic liver.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maxime Ronot
- Department of Radiology, APHP, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val de Seine, Beaujon, Clichy, Hauts-de-Seine, France; University Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France; INSERM U1149, centre de recherche biomédicale Bichat-Beaujon, CRB3, Paris, France.
| | - Valérie Vilgrain
- Department of Radiology, APHP, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val de Seine, Beaujon, Clichy, Hauts-de-Seine, France; University Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France; INSERM U1149, centre de recherche biomédicale Bichat-Beaujon, CRB3, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Barr DC, Hussain HK. MR Imaging in Cirrhosis and Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2014; 22:315-35. [DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2014.04.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
|
47
|
Abstract
Cirrhosis is the main risk factor for the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The major causative factors of cirrhosis in the United States and Europe are chronic hepatitis C infection and excessive alcohol consumption with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis emerging as another important risk factor. Magnetic resonance imaging is the most sensitive imaging technique for the diagnosis of HCC, and the sensitivity can be further improved with the use of diffusion-weighted imaging and hepatocyte-specific contrast agents. The combination of arterial phase hyperenhancement, venous or delayed phase hypointensity "washout feature," and capsular enhancement are features highly specific for HCC with reported specificities of 96% and higher. When these features are present in a mass in the cirrhotic liver, confirmatory biopsy to establish the diagnosis of HCC is not necessary. Other tumors, such as cholangiocarcinoma, sometimes occur in the cirrhotic at a much lower rate than HCC and can mimic HCC, as do other benign lesions such as perfusion abnormalities. In this article, we discuss the imaging features of cirrhosis and HCC, the role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of HCC and other benign and malignant lesions that occur in the cirrhotic liver, and the issue of nonspecific arterially hyperenhancing nodules often seen in cirrhosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel C Barr
- From the Department of Radiology/MRI, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI
| | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
The usefulness of the sum of relative enhancement ratio in making a differential diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma from cirrhosis-related nodules. Clin Imaging 2014; 38:154-9. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2013.10.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2013] [Revised: 10/24/2013] [Accepted: 10/29/2013] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
|
49
|
Bieze M, Klümpen HJ, Verheij J, Beuers U, Phoa SSKS, van Gulik TM, Bennink RJ. Diagnostic accuracy of (18) F-methylcholine positron emission tomography/computed tomography for intra- and extrahepatic hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 2014; 59:996-1006. [PMID: 24123111 DOI: 10.1002/hep.26781] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2013] [Revised: 09/16/2013] [Accepted: 10/01/2013] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
UNLABELLED Diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) primarily involves imaging. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of (18) F-fluorocholine ((18) F-FCH) positron emission tomography (PET) for detection of HCC and evaluation of extent of disease. Patients with HCC >1 cm were included between 2009 and July 2011, and follow-up closed in February 2013. Diagnosis was based on American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases criteria, and all patients underwent (18) F-FCH PET/computed tomography (CT) at baseline before treatment, 6 underwent a second PET/CT posttreatment, and 1 a third during follow-up. Whole-body PET and low-dose CT imaging were performed 15 minutes after (18) F-FCH injection. Evaluation of imaging was done with standardized uptake value (SUV) ratios: SUV maximum of the lesion divided by the SUV mean of surrounding tissue. Statistical analyses included descriptive analyses, receiver operating characteristic curve, McNemar's test, and Kaplan-Meier's test at 5% level of significance. Twenty-nine patients revealed 53 intrahepatic lesions. In 48 of 53 lesions, (18) F-FCH PET was positive (SUVratio , 1.95 ± 0.66; sensitivity, 88%; specificity, 100%). PET/CT showed uptake in 18 extrahepatic lesions and no uptake in 3 lesions affirmed non-HCC lesions; all lesions were confirmed with additional investigation (accuracy, 100%). In 17 of 29 patients, additional lesions were found on PET/CT imaging, with implications for treatment in 15 patients. Posttreatment PET/CT showed identical results, compared with standard treatment evaluation. CONCLUSION This study shows additional value of (18) F-FCH PET/CT for patients with HCC. (18) F-FCH PET/CT has implications for staging, management, and treatment evaluation because of accurate assessment of extrahepatic disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthanja Bieze
- Departments of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|