Literature DB >> 27456966

Hepatic stiffness measurement by using MR elastography: prognostic values after hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Dong Ho Lee1, Jeong Min Lee2,3, Nam-Joon Yi4, Kwang-Woong Lee4, Kyung-Suk Suh4, Jeong-Hoon Lee5, Kyung Bun Lee6, Joon Koo Han1,7.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate prognostic value of hepatic stiffness (HS) measurement using MR elastography (MRE) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated by hepatic resection (HR).
METHODS: We enrolled 144 patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage A HCCs initially treated by HR who underwent preoperative liver MRE between January 2010 and June 2013. HS values were measured using MRE. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine significant predictive factors for posthepatecomy liver failure (PHLF). Overall survival (OS) was analyzed by evaluating prognostic factors using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard regression model.
RESULTS: After HR, 43 patients (29.9 %) experienced PHLF. HS values were significant predictive factors for PHLF. In ROC analysis, the area under the curve of HS was 0.740 (P = 0.001) for PHLF. Thirty-one patients had HS values ≥ 4.02 kPa; the estimated 1, 3, 5-year survival were 90.0 %, 74.7 % and 65.4 %, respectively, versus 98.1 %, 96.5 % and 96.5 % in 113 patients with HS values < 4.02 kPa (P = 0.015). An HS value ≥ 4.02 kPa was the only significant affecting factor for OS.
CONCLUSION: HS values measured by MRE could predict PHLF development post-HR. Furthermore, an HS value ≥4.02 kPa was a significant predicting factor for poor OS post-HR. KEY POINTS: • Hepatic stiffness value was a predictive factor for developing posthepatectomy liver failureHepatic stiffness value was a significant affecting factor for OS • Hepatic stiffness value ≥ 4.02 kPa was a predictive factor for poor OS.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Hepatic stiffness value; Hepatocellular carcinoma; Magnetic resonance elastography; Overall survival; Posthepatectomy liver failure

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27456966     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-016-4499-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  45 in total

1.  Clarification of risk factors for hepatectomy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  M Ishikawa; S Yogita; H Miyake; Y Fukuda; M Harada; D Wada; S Tashiro
Journal:  Hepatogastroenterology       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec

Review 2.  Results of liver transplantation: with or without Milan criteria?

Authors:  Vincenzo Mazzaferro
Journal:  Liver Transpl       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 5.799

3.  Intention-to-treat analysis of surgical treatment for early hepatocellular carcinoma: resection versus transplantation.

Authors:  J M Llovet; J Fuster; J Bruix
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 17.425

4.  Non-hypervascular hepatobiliary phase hypointense nodules on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI: risk of HCC recurrence after radiofrequency ablation.

Authors:  Dong Ho Lee; Jeong Min Lee; Jae Young Lee; Se Hyung Kim; Jung Hoon Kim; Jung Hwan Yoon; Yoon Jun Kim; Jeong-Hoon Lee; Su Jong Yu; Joon Koo Han; Byung Ihn Choi
Journal:  J Hepatol       Date:  2014-12-18       Impact factor: 25.083

5.  Risk of major liver resection in patients with underlying chronic liver disease: a reappraisal.

Authors:  O Farges; B Malassagne; J F Flejou; S Balzan; A Sauvanet; J Belghiti
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Value of transient elastography measured with FibroScan in predicting the outcome of hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Matteo Cescon; Antonio Colecchia; Alessandro Cucchetti; Eugenia Peri; Luciana Montrone; Giorgio Ercolani; Davide Festi; Antonio Daniele Pinna
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 7.  Non-invasive evaluation of liver fibrosis using transient elastography.

Authors:  Laurent Castera; Xavier Forns; Alfredo Alberti
Journal:  J Hepatol       Date:  2008-02-26       Impact factor: 25.083

8.  Liver stiffness values in apparently healthy subjects: influence of gender and metabolic syndrome.

Authors:  Dominique Roulot; Sébastien Czernichow; Hervé Le Clésiau; Jean-Luc Costes; Anne-Claire Vergnaud; Michel Beaugrand
Journal:  J Hepatol       Date:  2008-01-03       Impact factor: 25.083

9.  Hepatitis activity should be considered a confounder of liver stiffness measured with MR elastography.

Authors:  Shintaro Ichikawa; Utaroh Motosugi; Tadao Nakazawa; Hiroyuki Morisaka; Katsuhiro Sano; Tomoaki Ichikawa; Nobuyuki Enomoto; Masanori Matsuda; Hideki Fujii; Hiroshi Onishi
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2014-06-03       Impact factor: 4.813

10.  Magnetic resonance elastography predicts advanced fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a prospective study.

Authors:  Rohit Loomba; Tanya Wolfson; Brandon Ang; Jonathan Hooker; Cynthia Behling; Michael Peterson; Mark Valasek; Grace Lin; David Brenner; Anthony Gamst; Richard Ehman; Claude Sirlin
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2014-10-29       Impact factor: 17.425

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  MR elastography of liver: current status and future perspectives.

Authors:  Ilkay S Idilman; Jiahui Li; Meng Yin; Sudhakar K Venkatesh
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-07-23

Review 2.  Quantitative Elastography Methods in Liver Disease: Current Evidence and Future Directions.

Authors:  Paul Kennedy; Mathilde Wagner; Laurent Castéra; Cheng William Hong; Curtis L Johnson; Claude B Sirlin; Bachir Taouli
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Magnetic resonance elastography can predict the development of hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Lianglong Wu; Junying Bi; Liangjin Liu; Yanni Zeng
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2021-08

Review 4.  Updates on Imaging of Liver Tumors.

Authors:  Arya Haj-Mirzaian; Ana Kadivar; Ihab R Kamel; Atif Zaheer
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2020-04-16       Impact factor: 5.075

5.  Prognostic Role of Liver Stiffness Measurements Using Magnetic Resonance Elastography in Patients with Compensated Chronic Liver Disease.

Authors:  Dong Ho Lee; Jeong Min Lee; Won Chang; Jung-Hwan Yoon; Yoon Jun Kim; Jeong-Hoon Lee; Su Jong Yu; Joon Koo Han
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Magnetic resonance elastography can predict development of hepatocellular carcinoma with longitudinally acquired two-point data.

Authors:  Shintaro Ichikawa; Utaroh Motosugi; Nobuyuki Enomoto; Hiroshi Onishi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-07-24       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Quantitative Ultrasound Radiofrequency Data Analysis for the Assessment of Hepatic Steatosis in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging Proton Density Fat Fraction as the Reference Standard.

Authors:  Sun Kyung Jeon; Jeong Min Lee; Ijin Joo; Sae Jin Park
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2021-03-09       Impact factor: 3.500

Review 8.  Magnetic resonance elastography of the liver: everything you need to know to get started.

Authors:  Kay M Pepin; Christopher L Welle; Flavius F Guglielmo; Jonathan R Dillman; Sudhakar K Venkatesh
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-11-01

9.  Prognostic value of liver stiffness measurement for the liver-related surgical outcomes of patients under hepatic resection: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zitong Huang; Jingjing Huang; Tianran Zhou; Hongying Cao; Bo Tan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Two-Dimensional-Shear Wave Elastography with a Propagation Map: Prospective Evaluation of Liver Fibrosis Using Histopathology as the Reference Standard.

Authors:  Dong Ho Lee; Eun Sun Lee; Jae Young Lee; Jae Seok Bae; Haeryoung Kim; Kyung Bun Lee; Su Jong Yu; Eun Ju Cho; Jeong Hoon Lee; Young Youn Cho; Joon Koo Han; Byung Ihn Choi
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2020-07-27       Impact factor: 3.500

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.