Literature DB >> 32377757

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

Seung-Seob Kim1, Sunyoung Lee1, Jin-Young Choi2, Joon Seok Lim1, Mi-Suk Park1, Myeong-Jin Kim1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of LR-M criteria for differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma, intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma, and combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma and to compare the imaging features of each type.
METHODS: In this retrospective study, 110 patients were surgically diagnosed with cholangiocarcinoma (n = 67) and combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (n = 43) at a single tertiary hospital between 2013 and 2018. Among them, those with risk factors were enrolled (16 cholangiocarcinomas and 33 combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinomas). Forty-nine other patients with size-matched hepatocellular carcinoma were selected as a control group. Two independent readers evaluated the imaging findings of the preoperative MRIs based on LI-RADS version 2018 and assigned an LI-RADS category. The diagnostic performance of the LR-M criteria for diagnosing cholangiocarcinoma or combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma was evaluated, and the imaging features were compared. The imaging findings of the tumors in patients without risk factors (51 cholangiocarcinomas and 10 combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinomas) were evaluated for subgroup analysis.
RESULTS: In the non-hepatocellular carcinoma group, 33 patients were categorized into LR-M and 14 patients into LR-5 (67.3% and 28.6%, respectively), while 5 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma were categorized into LR-M and 38 patients into LR-5 (10.2% and 77.6%, respectively). Sensitivity and specificity of the LR-M criteria were 67.3% and 89.8%, respectively. When more than two LR-M features were present, cholangiocarcinoma or combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma were suggested with a specificity of 95.9%.
CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of the LR-M criteria is acceptable with moderate sensitivity and high specificity for both cholangiocarcinoma and combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma. Imaging findings of primary hepatic carcinomas should be understood as a spectrum.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Carcinoma; Cholangiocarcinoma; Diagnosis; Differential; Hepatocellular; Liver neoplasms; Magnetic resonance imaging

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32377757     DOI: 10.1007/s00261-020-02562-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)


  33 in total

1.  Combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma: LI-RADS v2017 categorisation for differential diagnosis and prognostication on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  Sun Kyung Jeon; Ijin Joo; Dong Ho Lee; Sang Min Lee; Hyo-Jin Kang; Kyoung-Bun Lee; Jeong Min Lee
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Diagnostic accuracy of liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) v2014 for intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinomas in patients with chronic liver disease on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI.

Authors:  Ijin Joo; Jeong Min Lee; Sang Min Lee; Jeong Sub Lee; Jin Young Park; Joon Koo Han
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-04-18       Impact factor: 4.813

3.  LI-RADS Classification and Prognosis of Primary Liver Cancers at Gadoxetic Acid-enhanced MRI.

Authors:  Sang Hyun Choi; Seung Soo Lee; So Hyun Park; Kang Mo Kim; Eunsil Yu; Yangsoon Park; Yong Moon Shin; Moon-Gyu Lee
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-11-13       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  How to utilize LR-M features of the LI-RADS to improve the diagnosis of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma on gadoxetate-enhanced MRI?

Authors:  Hong Seon Lee; Myeong-Jin Kim; Chansik An
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-12-14       Impact factor: 5.315

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

Authors:  Yeun-Yoon Kim; Myeong-Jin Kim; Eun Hwa Kim; Yun Ho Roh; Chansik An
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Accuracy of the diagnostic evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma with LI-RADS.

Authors:  Weimin Liu; Jie Qin; Ruomi Guo; Sidong Xie; Hang Jiang; Xiaohong Wang; Zhuang Kang; Jin Wang; Hong Shan
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  2017-06-26       Impact factor: 1.990

7.  Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Imaging in Differentiation Borderline From Malignant Ovarian Epithelial Tumors: Correlation With Histological Cell Proliferation and Vessel Characteristics.

Authors:  Xiao-Li Song; Lifang Wang; Honghong Ren; Rong Wei; Jia-Liang Ren; Jinliang Niu
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 8.  Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) Version 2018: Imaging of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in At-Risk Patients.

Authors:  Victoria Chernyak; Kathryn J Fowler; Aya Kamaya; Ania Z Kielar; Khaled M Elsayes; Mustafa R Bashir; Yuko Kono; Richard K Do; Donald G Mitchell; Amit G Singal; An Tang; Claude B Sirlin
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-09-25       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Hepatocellular carcinoma: Can LI-RADS v2017 with gadoxetic-acid enhancement magnetic resonance and diffusion-weighted imaging improve diagnostic accuracy?

Authors:  Tong Zhang; Zi-Xing Huang; Yi Wei; Han-Yu Jiang; Jie Chen; Xi-Jiao Liu; Li-Kun Cao; Ting Duan; Xiao-Peng He; Chun-Chao Xia; Bin Song
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-02-07       Impact factor: 5.742

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  A Narrative Review on LI-RADS Algorithm in Liver Tumors: Prospects and Pitfalls.

Authors:  Federica De Muzio; Francesca Grassi; Federica Dell'Aversana; Roberta Fusco; Ginevra Danti; Federica Flammia; Giuditta Chiti; Tommaso Valeri; Andrea Agostini; Pierpaolo Palumbo; Federico Bruno; Carmen Cutolo; Roberta Grassi; Igino Simonetti; Andrea Giovagnoni; Vittorio Miele; Antonio Barile; Vincenza Granata
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-07
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.