| Literature DB >> 20461183 |
Suk Hee Heo1, Yong Yeon Jeong, Sang Soo Shin, Jin Woong Kim, Hyo Soon Lim, Jae Hyuk Lee, Yang Seok Koh, Chol Kyoon Cho, Heoung Keun Kang.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the histopathological differentiation and the expression ofEntities:
Keywords: Liver neoplasm; Liver neoplasm, MR; Magnetic resonance (MR), diffusion study
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20461183 PMCID: PMC2864856 DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2010.11.3.295
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Korean J Radiol ISSN: 1229-6929 Impact factor: 3.500
Patient's Characteristics (n = 27)
Note.- *Data are mean ± standard deviation, and other values are numbers of patients.
Fig. 1Method of apparent diffusion coefficient measurement. Apparent diffusion coefficient values were obtained by using five ROIs with uniform size (42 pixels) on apparent diffusion coefficient map (A), placed on area corresponding to enhancing solid portion of HCCs demonstrated on contrast-enhanced T1-weighted image (B). ROIs were carefully placed on solid portion to avoid cystic or necrotic portion.
Fig. 2Graphs of apparent diffusion coefficient value (×10-3 mm2/s) of hepatocellular carcinomas based on differentiation and vascular endothelial growth factor expression. Outlier indicates range; from largest to smallest observed data points within 1.5 interquartile range presented by box. Horizontal line is median (50th percentile) of measured values; top and bottom of box represent 25th and 75th percentiles, respectively. ADC = apparent diffusion coefficient, VEGF = vascular endothelial growth factor
A. There was significant difference in apparent diffusion coefficient values among well-, moderately- and poorly-differentiated hepatocellular carcinomas (p = 0.026, Kruskal-Wallis test). For pair-wise comparisons, apparent diffusion coefficient value of poorly-differentiated hepatocellular carcinomas was significantly lower than that of moderately-differentiated hepatocellular carcinomas (p = 0.013).
B. There was no significant difference between vascular endothelial growth factor expression and apparent diffusion coefficient value for hepatocellular carcinomas.
Fig. 351-year-old man with poorly-differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma.
A. Axial diffusion-weighted image (TR/TE, 8,000 ms/92 ms; and b - 1,000 sec/mm2) shows 4 × 3.5 cm hepatocellular carcinoma with high signal intensity in left hepatic lobe (arrows).
B. On diffusion coefficient map, apparent diffusion coefficient value of tumor (arrows) was 0.88 ± 0.04 (mean ± SD, ×10-3 mm2/s).
C. Photomicrograph (Hematoxylin & Eosin staining, ×200) reveals poorly-differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma with irregular nuclei, marked hyperchromatism, and increased mitoses.
Fig. 463-year-old man with moderately-differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma.
A. Axial diffusion-weighted image (TR/TE, 8,000 ms/92 ms; and b - 1,000 sec/mm2) shows 5 × 3 cm hepatocellular carcinoma with high signal intensity in right hepatic lobe (arrows).
B. On diffusion coefficient map, apparent diffusion coefficient value of tumor (arrows) was 1.14 ± 0.04 (mean ± SD, ×10-3 mm2/s).
C. Photomicrograph (Hematoxylin & Eosin staining, × 200) demonstrates moderately-differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma with round nuclei and relative decrease in mitotic activity.