Nora Schweitzer1, Bisharah Soudah2, Michael Gebel1, Michael Peter Manns1, Bita Boozari3. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endocrinology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 2. Institute of Pathology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 3. Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endocrinology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany ; Department of Internal Medicine I, Medical University Hospital Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Malignant vascular tumors of the liver are rare. The aim of this study was to investigate the applicability of gray scale and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in patients with epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) of the liver and hepatic angiosarcoma (HA) and to describe the clinical presentation. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all patients with epithelioid hemangioendothelioma or hemangiosarcoma of the liver from 1998 to 2011, who underwent ultrasound investigation. We describe the findings in gray scale and contrast-enhanced ultrasound and the clinical course of the disease of seven patients with EHE and five patients with HA. RESULTS: Ultrasound investigation in EHE showed mostly multiple hypoechoic irregular lesions close to the liver capsule and with a halo in some cases. Contrast enhancement revealed inhomogeneously and through all contrast phases vascularized tumors with a rim enhancement in 50%, with or without early wash out. All tumors had avascular parts. HA presented as multiple and irregular hypo-, iso- or hyperechoic lesions. After contrast enhancement, hypervascularization with individual patterns was evident in all patients. Of five, three had liquid parts. Patients with HA were significantly older (58 vs. 37 years, p = 0.014) and presented with lower thrombocyte counts (84 vs. 264, p = 0.0025) and with higher CEA levels (4.6 vs. 1.5, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: EHE and HA are inhomogeneous tumors, explaining the high inter-individual variability and heterogeneity in ultrasound examination. The presence of multifocal lesions, heterogeneity and undefined margins may differentiate EHE or HA from hemangioma. A biopsy is essential in the diagnosis of vascular tumors.
OBJECTIVES:Malignant vascular tumors of the liver are rare. The aim of this study was to investigate the applicability of gray scale and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in patients with epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) of the liver and hepatic angiosarcoma (HA) and to describe the clinical presentation. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all patients with epithelioid hemangioendothelioma or hemangiosarcoma of the liver from 1998 to 2011, who underwent ultrasound investigation. We describe the findings in gray scale and contrast-enhanced ultrasound and the clinical course of the disease of seven patients with EHE and five patients with HA. RESULTS: Ultrasound investigation in EHE showed mostly multiple hypoechoic irregular lesions close to the liver capsule and with a halo in some cases. Contrast enhancement revealed inhomogeneously and through all contrast phases vascularized tumors with a rim enhancement in 50%, with or without early wash out. All tumors had avascular parts. HA presented as multiple and irregular hypo-, iso- or hyperechoic lesions. After contrast enhancement, hypervascularization with individual patterns was evident in all patients. Of five, three had liquid parts. Patients with HA were significantly older (58 vs. 37 years, p = 0.014) and presented with lower thrombocyte counts (84 vs. 264, p = 0.0025) and with higher CEA levels (4.6 vs. 1.5, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: EHE and HA are inhomogeneous tumors, explaining the high inter-individual variability and heterogeneity in ultrasound examination. The presence of multifocal lesions, heterogeneity and undefined margins may differentiate EHE or HA from hemangioma. A biopsy is essential in the diagnosis of vascular tumors.
Authors: Joerg Trojan; Renate Hammerstingl; Knut Engels; Arne R Schneider; Stefan Zeuzem; Christoph F Dietrich Journal: J Clin Ultrasound Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 0.910
Authors: Michel Claudon; Christoph F Dietrich; Byung Ihn Choi; David O Cosgrove; Masatoshi Kudo; Christian P Nolsøe; Fabio Piscaglia; Stephanie R Wilson; Richard G Barr; Maria C Chammas; Nitin G Chaubal; Min-Hua Chen; Dirk Andre Clevert; Jean Michel Correas; Hong Ding; Flemming Forsberg; J Brian Fowlkes; Robert N Gibson; Barry B Goldberg; Nathalie Lassau; Edward L S Leen; Robert F Mattrey; Fuminori Moriyasu; Luigi Solbiati; Hans-Peter Weskott; Hui-Xiong Xu Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2012-11-05 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Arianeb Mehrabi; Arash Kashfi; Hamidreza Fonouni; Peter Schemmer; Bruno M Schmied; Peter Hallscheidt; Peter Schirmacher; Jurgen Weitz; Helmut Friess; Markus W Buchler; Jan Schmidt Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-11-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: D Strobel; K Seitz; W Blank; A Schuler; C Dietrich; A von Herbay; M Friedrich-Rust; G Kunze; D Becker; U Will; W Kratzer; F W Albert; C Pachmann; K Dirks; H Strunk; C Greis; T Bernatik Journal: Ultraschall Med Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 6.548
Authors: Max G Beckmann; Matthias J Bahr; Johannes Hadem; Martin Bredt; Heiner Wedemeyer; Andrea S Schneider; Stefan Kubicka; Michael P Manns; Christian P Strassburg; Jochen Wedemeyer Journal: Gastroenterol Res Pract Date: 2009-11-15 Impact factor: 2.260
Authors: Yi Dong; Wen-Ping Wang; Vito Cantisani; Mirko D'Onofrio; Andre Ignee; Lorenzo Mulazzani; Adrian Saftoiu; Zeno Sparchez; Ioan Sporea; Christoph F Dietrich Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-05-21 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Arianeb Mehrabi; Katrin Hoffmann; Karl Heinz Weiss; Carolin Mogler; Peter Schemmer; Markus W Büchler; Ingo Alldinger Journal: Ann Med Surg (Lond) Date: 2016-03-10