A-Hong Ren1,2, Peng-Fei Zhao1, Da-Wei Yang1, Jing-Bo Du2, Zhen-Chang Wang1, Zheng-Han Yang1. 1. Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, P.R. China. 2. Department of Radiology, People's Hospital of Beijing DaXing District, Capital Medical University, Beijing, P.R. China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is widely adopted for noninvasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). It's updated to version 2018 recently, with some major changes compared with v2017. However, the diagnostic performance of LI-RADS v2018 and its difference with v2017 are yet to be validated. PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic performances of LI-RADS on MR for diagnosing HCC between v2017 and v2018. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. SUBJECTS: In all, 181 patients with 217 hepatic observations (146 HCCs, 16 non-HCC malignancies and 55 benign lesions) with liver MRI and pathological or follow-up imaging diagnoses. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 1.5 T or 3 T MRI. Dual-echo T1 WI, T2 WI, diffusion-weighted imaging, and a liver acquisition with volume acceleration. Assessment Images were independently interpreted by three radiologists, and then in consensus for observations with different LR categories, according to LI-RADS v2017 and v2018, separately. STATISTICAL TESTS: Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (+LR), and Youden index. RESULTS: When adopting LR-5 as a predictor of HCC, the sensitivity (80.8% vs. 71.2%), NPV (69.6% vs. 60.7%), and accuracy (83.9% vs. 77.9%) were all increased for LI-RADS v2018 compared with v2017, with a greater Youden index (0.709 vs. 0.627). However, the diagnostic performances of MRI for diagnosing HCC were not changed while adopting LR-4/5 as a predictor. The threshold growths of 76% (19/25) observations in v2017 were revised to subthreshold growth in v2018, and 16 LR-4 observations in v2017 were changed to LR-5 based on v2018. DATA CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of LI-RADS v2018 for diagnosing HCC is superior to v2017, with a greater sensitivity, NPV, and accuracy. The revisions in v2018 mainly affect the categorization when adopting LR-5 as a predictor of HCC. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Technical Efficacy Stage: 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:746-755.
BACKGROUND: The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is widely adopted for noninvasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). It's updated to version 2018 recently, with some major changes compared with v2017. However, the diagnostic performance of LI-RADS v2018 and its difference with v2017 are yet to be validated. PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic performances of LI-RADS on MR for diagnosing HCC between v2017 and v2018. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. SUBJECTS: In all, 181 patients with 217 hepatic observations (146 HCCs, 16 non-HCC malignancies and 55 benign lesions) with liver MRI and pathological or follow-up imaging diagnoses. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 1.5 T or 3 T MRI. Dual-echo T1 WI, T2 WI, diffusion-weighted imaging, and a liver acquisition with volume acceleration. Assessment Images were independently interpreted by three radiologists, and then in consensus for observations with different LR categories, according to LI-RADS v2017 and v2018, separately. STATISTICAL TESTS: Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (+LR), and Youden index. RESULTS: When adopting LR-5 as a predictor of HCC, the sensitivity (80.8% vs. 71.2%), NPV (69.6% vs. 60.7%), and accuracy (83.9% vs. 77.9%) were all increased for LI-RADS v2018 compared with v2017, with a greater Youden index (0.709 vs. 0.627). However, the diagnostic performances of MRI for diagnosing HCC were not changed while adopting LR-4/5 as a predictor. The threshold growths of 76% (19/25) observations in v2017 were revised to subthreshold growth in v2018, and 16 LR-4 observations in v2017 were changed to LR-5 based on v2018. DATA CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of LI-RADS v2018 for diagnosing HCC is superior to v2017, with a greater sensitivity, NPV, and accuracy. The revisions in v2018 mainly affect the categorization when adopting LR-5 as a predictor of HCC. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Technical Efficacy Stage: 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:746-755.
Authors: Andrea Esposito; Valentina Buscarino; Dario Raciti; Elena Casiraghi; Matteo Manini; Pietro Biondetti; Laura Forzenigo Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2019-10-05 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Gehad Ahmad Saleh; Ahmed Abdel Khalek Abdel Razek; Lamiaa Galal El-Serougy; Walaa Shabana; Rihame Abd El-Wahab Journal: Pol J Radiol Date: 2022-01-17