Literature DB >> 30694166

Hepatocellular Carcinoma versus Other Hepatic Malignancy in Cirrhosis: Performance of LI-RADS Version 2018.

Yeun-Yoon Kim1, Myeong-Jin Kim1, Eun Hwa Kim1, Yun Ho Roh1, Chansik An1.   

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018 for differentiating between hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and other (hepatic) malignancy (OM) in patients with liver cirrhosis. Materials and Methods From 2008 to 2017, 55 patients with untreated OM and liver cirrhosis were eligible for this retrospective case-control study (mean age, 58 years ± 10 [standard deviation] [range, 32-79 years], with 45 men [mean age, 58 years ± 11] and 10 women [mean age, 62 years ± 7]). Control subjects consisted of 165 treatment-naive patients with HCC and liver cirrhosis (mean age, 58 years ± 10 [range, 29-80 years], with 134 men [mean age, 58 years ± 9] and 31 women [mean age, 59 years ± 11]). Two radiologists blinded to the final diagnosis independently determined the presence of LR-M features and major HCC features (non-rim arterial phase hyperenhancement, non-peripheral washout, and enhancing capsule). The diagnostic performances of each feature, the LR-M criteria (probably or definitely malignant, but not specific for HCC), and the LR-5 criteria (definitely HCC) were calculated and compared by using the generalized estimating equation method. Results Individual LR-M features had a sensitivity of 9%-71% and a specificity of 83%-97% for the diagnosis of OM. Major features of HCC had a sensitivity of 62%-83% and a specificity of 69%-89% for the diagnosis of HCC. The LR-M criteria had a sensitivity of 89% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 81%, 97%) for diagnosing OM, with a specificity of 48% (95% CI: 40%, 56%). The LR-5 criteria had a sensitivity of 74% (95% CI: 67%, 81%) for diagnosing HCC, with a specificity of 89% (95% CI: 81%, 97%). The accuracy of the LR-5 criteria was higher than that of the LR-M criteria (78% [95% CI: 72%, 83%] vs 58% [95% CI: 52%, 65%], P <. 001). Conclusion The LR-5 criteria as well as the LR-M criteria can effectively distinguish hepatocellular carcinoma from other hepatic malignancy in patients with liver cirrhosis. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Furlan in this issue.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30694166     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2019181995

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  21 in total

1.  Increasing the sensitivity of LI-RADS v2018 for diagnosis of small (10-19 mm) HCC on extracellular contrast-enhanced MRI.

Authors:  Jingbiao Chen; Sichi Kuang; Yao Zhang; Wenjie Tang; Sidong Xie; Linqi Zhang; Dailin Rong; Bingjun He; Ying Deng; Yuanqiang Xiao; Wenqi Shi; Kathryn Fowler; Jin Wang; Claude B Sirlin
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-10-11

2.  Differentiation of hepatocellular carcinoma from intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma in high-risk patients matched to MR field strength: diagnostic performance of LI-RADS version 2018.

Authors:  Xianlun Zou; Yan Luo; John N Morelli; Xuemei Hu; Yaqi Shen; Daoyu Hu
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-03-03

3.  The Course of LIRADS 3 and 4 Hepatic Abnormalities as Correlated With Explant Pathology: A Single Center Experience.

Authors:  Panita Mettikanont; Anita Kalluri; Therese Bittermann; Neil Phillips; Bao-Li Loza; Mark Rosen; Evan Siegelman; Emma Furth; Peter Abt; Kim Olthoff; Abraham Shaked; Maarouf Hoteit; K Rajender Reddy
Journal:  J Clin Exp Hepatol       Date:  2022-03-09

4.  Diagnostic Performance of LI-RADS Version 2018 for Primary Liver Cancer in Patients With Liver Cirrhosis on Enhanced MRI.

Authors:  Xinai Liu; Xiaoyan Ni; Yubo Li; Chun Yang; Yi Wang; Chunzheng Ma; Changwu Zhou; Xin Lu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 5.738

5.  New strategy for Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System category M to improve diagnostic performance of MRI for hepatocellular carcinoma ≤ 3.0 cm.

Authors:  Jong Keon Jang; Sang Hyun Choi; Jae Ho Byun; Seo Young Park; So Jung Lee; So Yeon Kim; Hyung Jin Won; Yong Moon Shin; Pyo-Nyun Kim
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2022-05-06

Review 6.  Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: pathogenesis, current staging, and radiological findings.

Authors:  Mohammed Saleh; Mayur Virarkar; Vlad Bura; Raul Valenzuela; Sanaz Javadi; Janio Szklaruk; Priya Bhosale
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-11

7.  Diagnostic performance of the LR-M criteria and spectrum of LI-RADS imaging features among primary hepatic carcinomas.

Authors:  Seung-Seob Kim; Sunyoung Lee; Jin-Young Choi; Joon Seok Lim; Mi-Suk Park; Myeong-Jin Kim
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-11

Review 8.  Diagnostic evaluation and ablation treatments assessment in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Vincenza Granata; Roberta Grassi; Roberta Fusco; Andrea Belli; Carmen Cutolo; Silvia Pradella; Giulia Grazzini; Michelearcangelo La Porta; Maria Chiara Brunese; Federica De Muzio; Alessandro Ottaiano; Antonio Avallone; Francesco Izzo; Antonella Petrillo
Journal:  Infect Agent Cancer       Date:  2021-07-19       Impact factor: 2.965

9.  A Nomogram Based on Combining Clinical Features and Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound LI-RADS Improves Prediction of Microvascular Invasion in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Hang Zhou; Jiawei Sun; Tao Jiang; Jiaqi Wu; Qunying Li; Chao Zhang; Ying Zhang; Jing Cao; Yu Sun; Yifan Jiang; Yajing Liu; Xianli Zhou; Pintong Huang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 6.244

10.  How to Use LI-RADS to Report Liver CT and MRI Observations.

Authors:  Guilherme M Cunha; Kathryn J Fowler; Alexandra Roudenko; Bachir Taouli; Alice W Fung; Khaled M Elsayes; Robert M Marks; Irene Cruite; Natally Horvat; Victoria Chernyak; Claude B Sirlin; An Tang
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2021-07-23       Impact factor: 6.312

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.