| Literature DB >> 22811588 |
Anne-Frédérique Manichon1, Brigitte Bancel, Marion Durieux-Millon, Christian Ducerf, Jean-Yves Mabrut, Marie-Annick Lepogam, Agnès Rode.
Abstract
Purpose. To review the contrast-enhanced ultrasonographic (CEUS) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging findings in 25 patients with 26 hepatocellular adenomas (HCAs) and to compare imaging features with histopathologic results from resected specimen considering the new immunophenotypical classification. Material and Methods. Two abdominal radiologists reviewed retrospectively CEUS cineloops and MR images in 26 HCA. All pathological specimens were reviewed and classified into four subgroups (steatotic or HNF 1α mutated, inflammatory, atypical or β-catenin mutated, and unspecified). Inflammatory infiltrates were scored, steatosis, and telangiectasia semiquantitatively evaluated. Results. CEUS and MRI features are well correlated: among the 16 inflammatory HCA, 7/16 presented typical imaging features: hypersignal T2, strong arterial enhancement with a centripetal filling, persistent on delayed phase. 6 HCA were classified as steatotic with typical imaging features: a drop out signal, slight arterial enhancement, vanishing on late phase. Four HCA were classified as atypical with an HCC developed in one. Five lesions displayed important steatosis (>50%) without belonging to the HNF1α group. Conclusion. In half cases, inflammatory HCA have specific imaging features well correlated with the amount of telangiectasia and inflammatory infiltrates. An HCA with important amount of steatosis noticed on chemical shift images does not always belong to the HNF1α group.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22811588 PMCID: PMC3395160 DOI: 10.1155/2012/418745
Source DB: PubMed Journal: HPB Surg ISSN: 0894-8569
Figure 1Inflammatory HCA (with typical imaging features): (a) The 10 cm lesion located in segments VIII and IV shows a marked hypervascularity after contrast injection on CEUS, (b) which is persistent in the delayed phase. (c) It is slightly hypointense with the surrounding parenchyma on T1W images with (d) no signal drop-out on the chemical shift sequence and (e) a high signal intensity on T2W fat-suppressed images. (f) It has a strong arterial enhancement after gadolinium administration, (g) which is persistent in the delayed phase. (h) Photograph of the resected specimen revealing a well-circumscribed brown mass with some vessels cut in a transverse plane. (i, j) It shows typical aspects with obvious telangiectasia (70%) and inflammatory infiltrates (grade 3) (black arrows) around thick arteries.
Figure 2Inflammatory HCA (with less typical imaging features): (a) the 5 cm lesion has slight and homogeneous enhancement after microbubble contrast agent injection and (b) becomes isoechoic relative to the adjacent liver parenchyma. (c) The lesion (black arrow) located in segment II is isointense on T1W images with (d) a drop-out signal on chemical shift images and (e) hypointense on T2 fat-suppressed images. (f) The arterial enhancement is slight (g) with a wash out in the delayed phase. (h) Macroscopic picture: well-limited, nonencapsulated tan-colour lesion without haemorrhagic changes. (i, j) The tumour shows moderate telangiectasia (30%, arrow head) mixed with steatotic hepatocytes (40%, black arrow).
Figure 3Steatotic HCA. (a) The 2.2 cm lesion, hyperechoic in B mode, has a very slight arterial enhancement, (b) which becomes isoechoic in the delayed phase after microbubble contrast agent injection. (c) The lesion (black arrow) appears isointense on T1W images with (d) an important drop-out signal on the chemical shift sequence, and (e) is hypointense on T2W images with (f) a slight arterial enhancement and (g) an apparent wash out in delayed phases. (h) Macroscopic picture shows a well limited tan-colour lesion. (i, j) Pathologic examination shows important proliferation of hepatocytes with extensive macro- and microvesicular steatosis.
Main pathological data considering HCA subtype.
| Inflammatory HCA | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inflammatory HCA with typical imaging features | Inflammatory HCA with less typical imaging features | Steatotic HCA | Atypical HCA | |
| Size of the nodule analyzed {min-max} (cm) | 7,6 {4,2–13} | 5,5 {3,5–9} | 3,75 {2,2–9} | 8,25 {2,5–11} |
| Steatosis | ||||
| grade 0 (<5%) | 4 | 5 | 0 | 2 |
| grade 1 (5–29%) | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| grade 2 (30–49%) | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| grade 3 (≥50%) | 0 | 2 | 6 | 0 |
| Telangiectasia | ||||
| grade 0 (<5%) | 0 | 0 | 6 | 4 |
| grade 1 (5–29%) | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| grade 2 (30–49%) | 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| grade 3 (≥50%) | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Inflammatory Infiltrates | ||||
| grade 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| grade 1 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 2 |
| grade 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| grade 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 0 |
Main clinical and biological data considering HCA subtype.
| Inflammatory HCA | Steatotic HCA | Atypical HCA | |
|---|---|---|---|
| patients ( | patients ( | patients ( | |
| lesions ( | lesions ( | lesions ( | |
| Age median {min-max} | 37 {23–50} | 33,5 {26–52} | 44,5 {21–47} |
| Sex |
|
|
|
| OP (or anabolic) use >2 years | 10 | 2 | 4 |
| BMI > 25 kg/m2 | 5 | 0 | 1 |
| Diabetes | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| Inflammatory Sd (CRP or fibrinogen) | 6 | 0 | 2 |
| Cholestasis | 7 | 0 | 2 |
| Circumstances of diagnosis | by chance: 8 | by chance: 5 | by chance: 2 |
| abdominal pain: 7 | abdominal pain: 1 | abdominal pain: 2 | |
| Solitary HCA | 8 | 2 | 2 |
| Multiple HCA <10 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| Multiple HCA ≥10 | 5 | 4 | 1 |
OP: oestroprogestative,
BMI: body mass index,
CRP: C-reactive protein.
Radiological (CEUS and MRI) features considering HCA subtype.
| Inflammatory HCA (typical on imaging) | Inflammatory HCA (less typical on imaging) | Steatotic HCA | Atypical HCA |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CEUS | B mode | HypoE | 3 (43%) | 5 (56%) | 0 | 1 (25%) | |
| IsoE | 2 (29%) | 1 (11%) | 1 (17%) | 1 (25%) | 0,2958 | ||
| HyperE | 2 (29%) | 3 (33%) | 5 (83%) (1 heterogeneous) | 2 (50%) | |||
| Arterial enhancement | None | 0 | 0 | 1 (17%) | 0 | ||
| Slight | 0 | 3 (33%) | 2 (33%) | 2 (50%) | 0,1514 | ||
| Moderate | 3 (43%) | 3 (33%) | 3 (50%) | 0 | |||
| Intense | 4 (57%) | 3 (33%) | 0 | 2 (50%) | |||
| Delayed enhancement | Persistent | 6 (86%) | 0 | 0 | 2 (50%) | ||
| IsoE | 1 (14%) | 6 (67%) | 3 (50%) | 1 (25%) | 0,0019 | ||
| HypoE | 0 | 3 (33%) | 3 (50%) | 1 (25%) | |||
| Homogeneousness enhancement | Homogeneous | 7 (100%) | 5 (56%) | 5 (83%) | 2 (50%) | 0,0517 | |
| Heterogeneous | 0 | 4 (44%) | 1 had no enhancement | 2 (50%) | |||
| Filling direction | Centripetal | 6 (86%) | 7 (78%) | 1 (17%) | 2 (50%) | 0,1012 | |
| Indifferent | 1 (14%) | 2 (22%) | 4 (67%)1 had no enhancement | 2 (50%) | 0,0273∗∗ | ||
|
| |||||||
| MRI | T1 | HypoS | 1 (14%) | 3 (33%) | 3 (50%) | 1 (25%) | |
| IsoS | 4 (57%) | 2 (22%) | 3 (50%) | 3 (75%) | 0,2253 | ||
| HyperS | 2 (29%) | 4 (33%) | 0 | 0 | |||
| IN/OUT | No drop out | 7 (100%) | 6 (67%) | 0 | 2 (50%) | 1,79E−04 | |
| Drop out | 0 | 3 (44%) | 6 (100%) included 1 heterogeneous | 2 (50%) included 1 heterogeneous | |||
| T2 | HypoS | 7 (100%) | 3 (33%) | 3 (50%) | 1 (25%) | ||
| IsoS | 0 | 1 (11%) | 1 (17%) | 2 (50%) | 0,1012 | ||
| HyperS | 0 | 5 (56%) | 2 (33%) | 1 (25%) | |||
| Arterial enhancement | None | 0 | 0 | 1 (17%) | 1 (25%) | ||
| Slight | 0 | 2 (22%) | 3 (50%) | 0 | 0,0026 | ||
| Moderate | 0 | 2 (22%) | 2 (33%) | 2 (50%) | |||
| Intense | 7 (100%) | 5 (56%) | 0 | 1 (25%) | |||
| Delayed phase | Persistent | 6 (86%) | 3 (33%) | 0 | 2 (50%) | ||
| IsoS | 1 (14%) | 1 (11%) | 0 | 0 | 0,005 | ||
| HypoS | 0 | 5 (56%) | 6 (100%) | 2 (50%) | |||
∗Test made with 4 categories of HCAs (inflammatory typical on imaging, inflamm less typical on imaging, steatotic and atypic),
∗∗Test made with 3 categories of HCAs (inflammatory, steatotic and atypic).