Hassan El Fattach1, Anthony Dohan2, Youcef Guerrache3, Raphael Dautry4, Mourad Boudiaf5, Christine Hoeffel6, Philippe Soyer7. 1. Department of Abdominal Imaging, Hôpital Lariboisière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 2 rue Ambroise Paré, 75010 Paris, France. Electronic address: hassangreenmed@gmail.com. 2. Department of Abdominal Imaging, Hôpital Lariboisière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 2 rue Ambroise Paré, 75010 Paris, France; Université Paris-Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, 10 Avenue de Verdun, 75010 Paris, France; UMR INSERM 965-Paris 7 "Angiogenèse et recherche translationnelle", 2 rue Amboise Paré, 75010 Paris, France. Electronic address: anthony.dohan@lrb.aphp.fr. 3. Department of Abdominal Imaging, Hôpital Lariboisière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 2 rue Ambroise Paré, 75010 Paris, France. Electronic address: docyoucef05@yahoo.fr. 4. Department of Abdominal Imaging, Hôpital Lariboisière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 2 rue Ambroise Paré, 75010 Paris, France; Université Paris-Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, 10 Avenue de Verdun, 75010 Paris, France. Electronic address: raphael.dautry@lrb.aphp.fr. 5. Department of Abdominal Imaging, Hôpital Lariboisière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 2 rue Ambroise Paré, 75010 Paris, France. Electronic address: mourad.boudiaf@lrb.aphp.fr. 6. Department of Radiology, Hôpital Robert Debré, 11 Boulevard Pasteur, 51092 Reims Cedex, France. Electronic address: choeffel-fornes@chu-reims.fr. 7. Department of Abdominal Imaging, Hôpital Lariboisière, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, 2 rue Ambroise Paré, 75010 Paris, France; Université Paris-Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité, 10 Avenue de Verdun, 75010 Paris, France; UMR INSERM 965-Paris 7 "Angiogenèse et recherche translationnelle", 2 rue Amboise Paré, 75010 Paris, France. Electronic address: philippe.soyer@lrb.aphp.fr.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To qualitatively and quantitatively analyze the presentation of intrahepatic and hilar mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma with diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with histopathologically proven mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (hilar, n=17; intrahepatic, n=11) underwent hepatic DW-MRI at 1.5-T using free-breathing acquisition and three b-values (0,400,800s/mm(2)). Cholangiocarcinomas were evaluated qualitatively using visual analysis of DW-MR images and quantitatively with conventional ADC and normalized ADC measurements using liver and spleen as reference organs. RESULTS: All cholangiocarcinomas (28/28; 100%) were visible on DW-MR images. DW-MRI yielded best conspicuity of cholangiocarcinomas than the other MRI sequences (P<0.001). Seven cholangiocarcinomas (7/11; 64%) showed hypointense central area on DW-MR images. Conventional ADC value of cholangiocarcinomas (1.042×10(-3)mm(2)/s±0.221×10(-3)mm(2)/s; range: 0.616×10(-3)mm(2)/s to 2.050×10(-3)mm(2)/s) was significantly lower than that of apparently normal hepatic parenchyma (1.362×10(-3)mm(2)/s±0.187×10(-3)mm(2)/s) (P<0.0001), although substantial overlap was found. No significant differences in ADC and normalized ADC values were found between intrahepatic and hilar cholangiocarcinomas. The use of normalized ADC using the liver as reference organ resulted in the most restricted distribution of ADC values of cholangiocarcinomas (variation coefficient=16.6%). CONCLUSION: There is a trend towards a common appearance of intrahepatic and hilar mass-forming cholangiocarcinomas on DW-MRI but variations may be observed. Familiarity with these variations may improve the diagnosis of mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma.
OBJECTIVE: To qualitatively and quantitatively analyze the presentation of intrahepatic and hilar mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma with diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with histopathologically proven mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (hilar, n=17; intrahepatic, n=11) underwent hepatic DW-MRI at 1.5-T using free-breathing acquisition and three b-values (0,400,800s/mm(2)). Cholangiocarcinomas were evaluated qualitatively using visual analysis of DW-MR images and quantitatively with conventional ADC and normalized ADC measurements using liver and spleen as reference organs. RESULTS: All cholangiocarcinomas (28/28; 100%) were visible on DW-MR images. DW-MRI yielded best conspicuity of cholangiocarcinomas than the other MRI sequences (P<0.001). Seven cholangiocarcinomas (7/11; 64%) showed hypointense central area on DW-MR images. Conventional ADC value of cholangiocarcinomas (1.042×10(-3)mm(2)/s±0.221×10(-3)mm(2)/s; range: 0.616×10(-3)mm(2)/s to 2.050×10(-3)mm(2)/s) was significantly lower than that of apparently normal hepatic parenchyma (1.362×10(-3)mm(2)/s±0.187×10(-3)mm(2)/s) (P<0.0001), although substantial overlap was found. No significant differences in ADC and normalized ADC values were found between intrahepatic and hilar cholangiocarcinomas. The use of normalized ADC using the liver as reference organ resulted in the most restricted distribution of ADC values of cholangiocarcinomas (variation coefficient=16.6%). CONCLUSION: There is a trend towards a common appearance of intrahepatic and hilar mass-forming cholangiocarcinomas on DW-MRI but variations may be observed. Familiarity with these variations may improve the diagnosis of mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma.
Authors: Michael J King; Stefanie Hectors; Karen M Lee; Olamide Omidele; James S Babb; Myron Schwartz; Parissa Tabrizian; Bachir Taouli; Sara Lewis Journal: Cancer Imaging Date: 2020-07-03 Impact factor: 3.909