OBJECTIVES: Evaluation of enhancement characteristics of histopathologically confirmed focal nodular hyperplasias (FNHs) and hepatocellular adenomas (HCAs) with gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. METHODS: Sixty-eight patients with 115 histopathologically proven lesions (FNHs, n=44; HCAs, n=71) examined with gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI were retrospectively enrolled (standard of reference: surgical resection, n=53 patients (lesions: FNHs, n=37; HCAs, n=53); biopsy, n=15 (lesions: FNHs, n=7; HCAs, n=18)). Two radiologists evaluated all MR images regarding morphological features as well as the vascular and hepatocyte-specific enhancement in consensus. RESULTS: For the hepatobiliary phase, relative enhancement of the lesions and lesion to liver enhancement were significantly lower for HCAs (mean, 48.7 (±48.4)%and 49.4 (±33.9) %) compared to FNHs (159.3 (±92.5) %; and 151.7 (±79) %; accuracy of 89%and 90 %, respectively; P<0.001). Visual strong uptake of FNHs vs. hypointensity of HCAs in the hepatobiliary phase resulted in an accuracy of 92 %. This parameter was superior to all other morphological and dynamic vascular criteria alone and in combination (accuracy, 54–85 %). CONCLUSIONS: For differentiation of FNHs and HCAs by means of MRI, gadoxetic acid uptake in the hepatobiliary phase was found to be superior to all other criteria alone and in combination. KEY POINTS: EOB-MRI is well suited to differentiate FNHs and hepatocellular adenomas. For this purpose hepatobiliary phase is superior to unenhanced and dynamic imaging. Hepatobiliary phase (peripheral) hyper- or isointensity is typical for FNH. Hepatobiliary phase hypointensity is typical for hepatocellular adenomas. EOB-MRI helps to avoid misinterpretations of benign hepatocellular lesions.
OBJECTIVES: Evaluation of enhancement characteristics of histopathologically confirmed focal nodular hyperplasias (FNHs) and hepatocellular adenomas (HCAs) with gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. METHODS: Sixty-eight patients with 115 histopathologically proven lesions (FNHs, n=44; HCAs, n=71) examined with gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI were retrospectively enrolled (standard of reference: surgical resection, n=53 patients (lesions: FNHs, n=37; HCAs, n=53); biopsy, n=15 (lesions: FNHs, n=7; HCAs, n=18)). Two radiologists evaluated all MR images regarding morphological features as well as the vascular and hepatocyte-specific enhancement in consensus. RESULTS: For the hepatobiliary phase, relative enhancement of the lesions and lesion to liver enhancement were significantly lower for HCAs (mean, 48.7 (±48.4)%and 49.4 (±33.9) %) compared to FNHs (159.3 (±92.5) %; and 151.7 (±79) %; accuracy of 89%and 90 %, respectively; P<0.001). Visual strong uptake of FNHs vs. hypointensity of HCAs in the hepatobiliary phase resulted in an accuracy of 92 %. This parameter was superior to all other morphological and dynamic vascular criteria alone and in combination (accuracy, 54–85 %). CONCLUSIONS: For differentiation of FNHs and HCAs by means of MRI, gadoxetic acid uptake in the hepatobiliary phase was found to be superior to all other criteria alone and in combination. KEY POINTS: EOB-MRI is well suited to differentiate FNHs and hepatocellular adenomas. For this purpose hepatobiliary phase is superior to unenhanced and dynamic imaging. Hepatobiliary phase (peripheral) hyper- or isointensity is typical for FNH. Hepatobiliary phase hypointensity is typical for hepatocellular adenomas. EOB-MRI helps to avoid misinterpretations of benign hepatocellular lesions.
Authors: Matthanja Bieze; Jacomina W van den Esschert; C Yung Nio; Joanne Verheij; Johannes B Reitsma; Valeska Terpstra; Thomas M van Gulik; Saffire S K S Phoa Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Sara Vander Borght; Louis Libbrecht; Hans Blokzijl; Klaas Nico Faber; Han Moshage; Raymond Aerts; Werner Van Steenbergen; Peter L Jansen; Valeer J Desmet; Tania A Roskams Journal: J Pathol Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 7.996
Authors: Susanna M van Aalten; Joanne Verheij; Turkan Terkivatan; Roy S Dwarkasing; Robert A de Man; Jan N M Ijzermans Journal: J Hepatol Date: 2010-11-24 Impact factor: 25.083
Authors: L B Eisenberg; D M Warshauer; J T Woosley; W G Cance; H Bunzendahl; R C Semelka Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 1995 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: Maxime Ronot; Sara Di Renzo; Bettina Gregoli; Rafael Duran; Laurent Castera; Bernard E Van Beers; Valérie Vilgrain Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-09-19 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: E Reizine; M Ronot; M Ghosn; J Calderaro; N Frulio; P Bioulac-Sage; H Trillaud; V Vilgrain; V Paradis; A Luciani Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2020-11-04 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Mirelle E E Bröker; Anne J Klompenhouwer; Marcia P Gaspersz; Annick M E Alleleyn; Roy S Dwarkasing; Indra C Pieters; Robert A de Man; Jan N M IJzermans Journal: World J Surg Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Pola Borusewicz; Ewa Stańczyk; Krzysztof Kubiak; Jolanta Spużak; Kamila Glińska-Suchocka; Marcin Jankowski; Piotr Sławuta; Dominika Kubiak-Nowak; Przemysław Podgórski Journal: BMC Vet Res Date: 2019-08-14 Impact factor: 2.741