A study on the inconsistency of arterial phase hypervascularity detection between contrast-enhanced ultrasound using sonazoid and gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine penta-acetic acid magnetic resonance imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma lesions.
Aged
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular
/ diagnostic imaging
Contrast Media
Female
Ferric Compounds
Gadolinium DTPA
Humans
Image Enhancement
/ methods
Iron
Liver
/ diagnostic imaging
Liver Neoplasms
/ diagnostic imaging
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
/ methods
Male
Oxides
Reproducibility of Results
Retrospective Studies
Ultrasonography
/ methods
Arterial phase
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound
Gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine penta-acetic acid magnetic resonance imaging
Hepatocellular carcinoma
Vascularity
Journal
Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001)
ISSN: 1613-2254
Titre abrégé: J Med Ultrason (2001)
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 101128385
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2021
Apr 2021
Historique:
received:
19
08
2020
accepted:
24
02
2021
pubmed:
16
3
2021
medline:
6
7
2021
entrez:
15
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
By analyzing possible factors contributing to imaging misevaluation of arterial phase (AP) vascularity, we aimed to provide a more proper way to detect AP hypervascularity of hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) using the noninvasive imaging modalities magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). We retrospectively recruited 164 pathologically confirmed HCC lesions from 128 patients. Using CEUS with Sonazoid (SCEUS) and gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine penta-acetic acid MRI (EOB-MRI), AP vascularity of the lesions was evaluated and inconsistencies in interpretation were examined. Indicators of margin, echogenicity, and halo and mosaic signs of lesions on grayscale US; depth of lesions on SCEUS; and tumoral homogeneity, signal contrast ratio of lesions to the surrounding area on precontrast and AP images on EOB-MRI, and histological grade were investigated. When precontrast images were used to adjust the AP enhancement ratio, the proportion of inconsistent interpretations of AP vascularity declined from 26.2% (43/164; 29 non-hypervascularity instances using EOB-MRI and 14 using SCEUS) to 16.5% (27/164; 7 using EOB-MRI and 20 using SCEUS). Greater lesion depth (P = 0.017), ill-defined tumoral margin (P = 0.028), absence of halo sign (P = 0.034), and histologically early HCC (P = 0.007) on SCEUS, and small size (P = 0.012) and heterogeneity (P = 0.013) of lesions and slight enhancement (low AP enhancement ratio) (P = 0.018 and 0.009 before and after adjustment) on EOB-MRI, may relate to undetectable hypervascularity. SCEUS and EOB-MRI may show discrepancies in evaluating AP vascularity in the case of deep, ill-defined, heterogeneous, slightly enhanced lesions, and histologically early HCCs. We recommend adjusting AP with precontrast images in EOB-MRI, and combining both modalities to detect hypervascularity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33721130
doi: 10.1007/s10396-021-01086-2
pii: 10.1007/s10396-021-01086-2
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Ferric Compounds
0
Oxides
0
Sonazoid
0
gadolinium ethoxybenzyl DTPA
0
Iron
E1UOL152H7
Gadolinium DTPA
K2I13DR72L
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
215-224Références
Kitao A, Zen Y, Matsui O, et al. Hepatocarcinogenesis: Multistep changes of drainage vessels at CT during arterial portography and hepatic arteriography–radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology. 2009;252:605–14.
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2522081414
Bartolotta TV, Taibbi A, Midiri M, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of hepatocellular carcinoma: where do we stand? Ultrasonography. 2019;38:200–14.
doi: 10.14366/usg.18060
Takahashi M, Maruyama H, Shimada T, et al. Characterization of hepatic lesions (≤ 30 mm) with liver-specific contrast agents: a comparison between ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82:75–84.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.05.035
Cassinotto C, Aube C, Dohan A. Diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update on international guidelines. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2017;98:379–91.
doi: 10.1016/j.diii.2017.01.014
Kim DK, An C, Chung YE, et al. Hepatobiliary versus extracellular MRI contrast agents in hepatocellular carcinoma detection: hepatobiliary phase features in relation to disease-free survival. Radiology. 2019;293:594–604.
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019190414
Ishii T, Numata K, Hao Y, et al. Evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma tumor vascularity using contrast-enhanced ultrasonography as a predictor for local recurrence following radiofrequency ablation. Eur J Radiol. 2017;89:234–41.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.12.018
Mandai M, Koda M, Matono T, et al. Assessment of hepatocellular carcinoma by contrast-enhanced ultrasound with perfluorobutane microbubbles: comparison with dynamic CT. Br J Radiol. 2011;84:499–507.
doi: 10.1259/bjr/38682601
Numata K, Fukuda H, Miwa H, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography findings using a perflubutane-based contrast agent in patients with early hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83:95–102.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.09.025
Toyota N, Nakamura Y, Hieda M, et al. Diagnostic capability of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced liver MRI for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison with multi-detector CT. Hiroshima J Med Sci. 2013;62:55–61.
pubmed: 24279123
Sugimoto K, Moriyasu F, Shiraishi J, et al. Assessment of arterial hypervascularity of hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of contrast-enhanced US and gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MR imaging. Eur Radiol. 2012;22:1205–13.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2372-3
Burns PN, Wilson SR. Focal liver masses: Enhancement patterns on contrast-enhanced images–concordance of US scans with CT scans and MR images. Radiology. 2007;242:162–74.
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2421051006
Stocker D, Becker AS, Barth BK, et al. Does quantitative assessment of arterial phase hyperenhancement and washout improve LI-RADS v2018-based classification of liver lesions? Eur Radiol. 2020;30:2922–33.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06596-9
Hennedige T, Yang ZJ, Ong CK, et al. Utility of non-contrast-enhanced CT for improved detection of arterial phase hyperenhancement in hepatocellular carcinoma. Abdom Imaging. 2014;39:1247–54.
doi: 10.1007/s00261-014-0174-1
Kim M, Kang TW, Cha DI, et al. Identification of arterial hyperenhancement in CT and MRI in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: value of unenhanced images. Korean J Radiol. 2019;20:236–45.
doi: 10.3348/kjr.2018.0339
An C, Park MS, Kim D, et al. Added value of subtraction imaging in detecting arterial enhancement in small (< 3 cm) hepatic nodules on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in patients at high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2013;23:924–30.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-012-2685-x
Wang F, Numata K, Nihonmatsu H, et al. Application of new ultrasound techniques for focal liver lesions. J Med Ultrason. 2001;2020(47):215–37.
Lyshchik A, Kono Y, Dietrich CF, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the liver: technical and lexicon recommendations from the ACR CEUS LI-RADS working group. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2018;43:861–79.
doi: 10.1007/s00261-017-1392-0
Ohama H, Imai Y, Nakashima O, et al. Images of Sonazoid-enhanced ultrasonography in multistep hepatocarcinogenesis: comparison with Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI. J Gastroenterol. 2014;49:1081–93.
doi: 10.1007/s00535-013-0859-1
Wang F, Numata K, Nakano M, et al. Diagnostic value of imaging methods in the histological four grading of hepatocellular carcinoma. Diagnostics (Basel). 2020;10:321.
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics10050321
Wilson SR, Kim TK, Jang HJ, et al. Enhancement patterns of focal liver masses: discordance between contrast-enhanced sonography and contrast-enhanced CT and MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189:W7-12.
doi: 10.2214/AJR.06.1060
Dietrich CF, Averkiou M, Nielsen MB, et al. How to perform contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Ultrasound Int Open. 2018;4:E2-15.
doi: 10.1055/s-0043-123931
Greis C. Technical aspects of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) examinations: tips and tricks. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2014;58:89–95.
doi: 10.3233/CH-141873
Nihonmatsu H, Numata K, Fukuda H, et al. Low mechanical index contrast mode versus high mechanical index contrast mode: Which is a more sensitive method for detecting Sonazoid microbubbles in the liver of normal subjects? J Med Ultrason. 2001;2016(43):211–7.
Dong Y, Wang WP, Mao F, et al. Application of imaging fusion combining contrast-enhanced ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in detection of hepatic cellular carcinomas undetectable by conventional ultrasound. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;31:822–8.
doi: 10.1111/jgh.13202
Kagawa Y, Okada M, Kumano S, et al. Optimal scanning protocol of arterial dominant phase for hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma with gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid-enhanced MR. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;33:864–72.
doi: 10.1002/jmri.22487
Ramalho M, Matos AP, AlObaidy M, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the cirrhotic liver: diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma and evaluation of response to treatment—part 1. Radiol Bras. 2017;50:38–47.
doi: 10.1590/0100-3984.2015.0132
Kondo F. Histological features of early hepatocellular carcinomas and their developmental process: for daily practical clinical application : hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatol Int. 2009;3:283–93.
doi: 10.1007/s12072-008-9107-9