Rihyeon Kim1, Jeong Min Lee2,3, Cheong-Il Shin1, Eun Sun Lee4, Jeong Hee Yoon1, Ijin Joo1, Seong Ho Kim1, Inpyeong Hwang1, Joon Koo Han1,5, Byung Ihn Choi4. 1. Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, Korea. 2. Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, Korea. jmsh@snu.ac.kr. 3. Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, Korea. jmsh@snu.ac.kr. 4. Department of Radiology, Chung-Ang University Hospital, 102, Heukseok-ro, Dongjak-gu, Seoul, Korea. 5. Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the different imaging features of intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (IMCC) from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: This retrospective study was institutional review board approved and the requirement for informed consent was waived. Patients who underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI with histologically confirmed IMCCs (n = 46) or HCCs (n = 58) were included. Imaging features of IMCCs and HCCs on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI including T2- and T1-weighted, diffusion weighted images, dynamic study and hepatobiliary phase (HBP) images were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify relevant differentiating features between IMCCs and HCCs. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis revealed heterogeneous T2 signal intensity and a hypointense rim on the HBP as suggestive findings of IMCCs and the wash-in and "portal wash-out" enhancement pattern as well as focal T1 high signal intensity foci as indicative of HCCs (all, p < 0.05). When we combined any three of the above four imaging features, we were able to diagnose IMCCs with 94 % (43/46) sensitivity and 86 % (50/58) specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Combined interpretation of enhancement characteristics including HBP images, morphologic features, and strict application of the "portal wash-out" pattern helped more accurate discrimination of IMCCs from HCCs. KEY POINTS: • Analysis of enhancement characteristics helped accurate discrimination of IMCCs from HCCs. • Wash-out should be determined on the PVP of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. • A hypointense rim on the HBP was a significant finding of IMCCs.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the different imaging features of intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (IMCC) from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: This retrospective study was institutional review board approved and the requirement for informed consent was waived. Patients who underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI with histologically confirmed IMCCs (n = 46) or HCCs (n = 58) were included. Imaging features of IMCCs and HCCs on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI including T2- and T1-weighted, diffusion weighted images, dynamic study and hepatobiliary phase (HBP) images were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify relevant differentiating features between IMCCs and HCCs. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis revealed heterogeneous T2 signal intensity and a hypointense rim on the HBP as suggestive findings of IMCCs and the wash-in and "portal wash-out" enhancement pattern as well as focal T1 high signal intensity foci as indicative of HCCs (all, p < 0.05). When we combined any three of the above four imaging features, we were able to diagnose IMCCs with 94 % (43/46) sensitivity and 86 % (50/58) specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Combined interpretation of enhancement characteristics including HBP images, morphologic features, and strict application of the "portal wash-out" pattern helped more accurate discrimination of IMCCs from HCCs. KEY POINTS: • Analysis of enhancement characteristics helped accurate discrimination of IMCCs from HCCs. • Wash-out should be determined on the PVP of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. • A hypointense rim on the HBP was a significant finding of IMCCs.
Authors: Thomas A Hope; Kathryn J Fowler; Claude B Sirlin; Eduardo A C Costa; Judy Yee; Benjamin M Yeh; Jay P Heiken Journal: Abdom Imaging Date: 2015-03
Authors: Hyeon Tae Jeong; Myeong-Jin Kim; Yong Eun Chung; Jin Young Choi; Young Nyun Park; Ki Whang Kim Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Ramón Vilana; Alejandro Forner; Luis Bianchi; Angeles García-Criado; Jordi Rimola; Carlos Rodríguez de Lope; María Reig; Carmen Ayuso; Concepció Brú; Jordi Bruix Journal: Hepatology Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: Su Jin Kim; Jeong Min Lee; Joon Koo Han; Ki Hyun Kim; Jae Young Lee; Byung Ihn Choi Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Anum Aslam; Amita Kamath; Bradley Spieler; Mark Maschiocchi; Carl F Sabottke; Victoria Chernyak; Sara C Lewis Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2021-04-15
Authors: Andreas Gutzeit; Simon Matoori; Johannes M Froehlich; Constantin von Weymarn; Carolin Reischauer; Orpheus Kolokythas; Matthias Goyen; Klaus Hergan; Matthias Meissnitzer; Rosemarie Forstner; Jan D Soyka; Aleksis Doert; Dow-Mu Koh Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-11-16 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Richard C Semelka; Nadesan Nimojan; Saman Chandana; Miguel Ramalho; Suzanne L Palmer; Danielle DeMulder; Carolina Parada Villavicencio; John Woosley; Bonnie L Garon; Reena C Jha; Frank H Miller; Ersan Altun Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-10-27 Impact factor: 5.315