Lambros Tselikas1, Frederic Pigneur1, Marion Roux1, Laurence Baranes1, Charlotte Costentin2, Vincent Roche1, Julien Calderaro3,4, Edouard Herin1, Alexis Laurent4,5,6, Elie Zafrani3, Daniel Azoulay4,5, Ariane Mallat2,4, Alain Rahmouni1,4, Alain Luciani7,8,9. 1. Imagerie Medicale, CHU Henri Mondor, AP-HP, Groupe Henri Mondor Albert Chenevier, 51 avenue du Marechal de Lattre de Tassigny, 94010, Créteil, France. 2. Hepatology Department, AP-HP, Groupe Henri Mondor Albert Chenevier, Créteil, 94010, France. 3. Department of Pathology, AP-HP, Groupe Henri Mondor Albert Chenevier, Créteil, 94010, France. 4. Universite Paris Est Creteil, Créteil, 94010, France. 5. Liver Surgery Department, AP-HP, Groupe Henri Mondor Albert Chenevier, Créteil, 94010, France. 6. INSERM IMRB Unit U 955, Equipe 18, Créteil, 94010, France. 7. Imagerie Medicale, CHU Henri Mondor, AP-HP, Groupe Henri Mondor Albert Chenevier, 51 avenue du Marechal de Lattre de Tassigny, 94010, Créteil, France. alain.luciani@aphp.fr. 8. Universite Paris Est Creteil, Créteil, 94010, France. alain.luciani@aphp.fr. 9. INSERM IMRB Unit U 955, Equipe 18, Créteil, 94010, France. alain.luciani@aphp.fr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the added values of hepatobiliary phase (HBP) MRI and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in addition to inconclusive extracellular gadolinium-based contrast-enhanced MRI (CE-MRI) to characterize benign hepatocellular tumors (BHT). METHODS: Eighty-three BHT-46 focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) and 37 hepatocellular adenomas (HCA)-with inconclusive CE-MRI in 54 patients (43 women and 11 men, mean age 42 years old ± 14.8) were retrospectively analyzed. All patients underwent both HBP-MRI and CEUS. Two radiologists independently reviewed 2 sets of images, SET-1: CE-MRI and HBP-MRI; SET-2: CE-MRI and CEUS, and classified lesions as "definite FNH," "possible FNH," or "definitely not FNH." Sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Spe) were compared between the two sets; subgroup analyses according to the lesion's size were performed. RESULTS: Regardless of lesion size, the respective Se and Spe of both datasets were not statistically different (95.7 and 100% vs. 76.1 and 94.6% for set-1 and -2 respectively; p = 0.18). For lesions larger than 35 mm, although both sets had similar specificity (100%), sensitivity was higher for SET-1 (100% vs. 40%); p = 0.04. Tumor classifications using SET-1 and SET-2 could have changed patient management in 35/54 (64.8%) and 33/54 (61.1%) of all patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: HBP-MRI or CEUS should be performed after an inconclusive CE-MRI. Both can change patient management by avoiding unnecessary biopsy or surveillance. The use of HBP-MRI should be advocated over CEUS in larger (>35 mm) lesions.
PURPOSE: To compare the added values of hepatobiliary phase (HBP) MRI and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in addition to inconclusive extracellular gadolinium-based contrast-enhanced MRI (CE-MRI) to characterize benign hepatocellular tumors (BHT). METHODS: Eighty-three BHT-46 focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) and 37 hepatocellular adenomas (HCA)-with inconclusive CE-MRI in 54 patients (43 women and 11 men, mean age 42 years old ± 14.8) were retrospectively analyzed. All patients underwent both HBP-MRI and CEUS. Two radiologists independently reviewed 2 sets of images, SET-1: CE-MRI and HBP-MRI; SET-2: CE-MRI and CEUS, and classified lesions as "definite FNH," "possible FNH," or "definitely not FNH." Sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Spe) were compared between the two sets; subgroup analyses according to the lesion's size were performed. RESULTS: Regardless of lesion size, the respective Se and Spe of both datasets were not statistically different (95.7 and 100% vs. 76.1 and 94.6% for set-1 and -2 respectively; p = 0.18). For lesions larger than 35 mm, although both sets had similar specificity (100%), sensitivity was higher for SET-1 (100% vs. 40%); p = 0.04. Tumor classifications using SET-1 and SET-2 could have changed patient management in 35/54 (64.8%) and 33/54 (61.1%) of all patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: HBP-MRI or CEUS should be performed after an inconclusive CE-MRI. Both can change patient management by avoiding unnecessary biopsy or surveillance. The use of HBP-MRI should be advocated over CEUS in larger (>35 mm) lesions.
Authors: Pavel Taimr; Anne Julia Klompenhouwer; Maarten G J Thomeer; Bettina E Hansen; Jan N M Ijzermans; Robert A de Man; Robert J de Knegt Journal: J Clin Ultrasound Date: 2018-05-08 Impact factor: 0.910