Hee-Soo Kim, Joon-Il Choi, Bohyun Kim, Seo Yeon Youn, Hokun Kim, Dong Hwan Kim, S. Rha
{"title":"LI-RADS 2018版在有肝癌病史的患者中的应用:LR4观察结果足以诊断复发性HCC吗?","authors":"Hee-Soo Kim, Joon-Il Choi, Bohyun Kim, Seo Yeon Youn, Hokun Kim, Dong Hwan Kim, S. Rha","doi":"10.13104/imri.2021.25.3.172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: We evaluated the diagnostic performance of LI-RADS version 2018 using gadoxetic acid enhanced MRI for recurrent but untreated HCC in patients with prior history of HCC. Materials and Methods: We enrolled 50 consecutive patients who 1) prior history of treatment of HCC, 2) underwent liver surgery for radiological/clinical diagnosis of new HCC between 2013 to 2018, 3) had gadoxetic acid enhanced MRI within one month before surgery, and 4) did not have more than five HCCs or infiltrative tumors only. Two radiologists reviewed MRI and determined the presence of LR3, LR4 and LR5 observations except previously treated tumors based on LI-RADS version 2018 in consensus. We sub-classified LR4 into LR4m (LR4 with major features only) and LR4u (LR4 upgraded from LR3 by ancillary features). LR4u were further sub-classified into LR4ua (with arterial phase hyperenhancement) and LR4un (without arterial phase hyperenhancement). Results: PPV for LR5, LR4 and LR3 observations for recurrent HCC were 100%, 61.5% and 25.0%, respectively. 100% (3/3) of LR4m were HCC. However, PPV of LR4u was 56.5%. PPV of LR4ua and LR4un were 73.3% and 25.0%, respectively. Sensitivity of LR5 and LR5+LR4 observations as a diagnostic threshold were 32.1% and 89.3%, respectively. Sensitivity for LR5+LR4m+LR4ua observations for diagnosis of HCC were 83.7% and significantly superior to that of LR5 without significant deterioration of specificity (75.0%). Conclusion: In patients with prior history of HCC, LR4 observations by major features or with APHE may be regarded as recurrent HCCs given high sensitivity and comparable specificity/PPV to LR5 observations.","PeriodicalId":73505,"journal":{"name":"Investigative magnetic resonance imaging","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"LI-RADS version 2018 in Patients with Prior History of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Are LR4 Observations Enough for the Diagnosis of Recurrent HCC?\",\"authors\":\"Hee-Soo Kim, Joon-Il Choi, Bohyun Kim, Seo Yeon Youn, Hokun Kim, Dong Hwan Kim, S. Rha\",\"doi\":\"10.13104/imri.2021.25.3.172\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: We evaluated the diagnostic performance of LI-RADS version 2018 using gadoxetic acid enhanced MRI for recurrent but untreated HCC in patients with prior history of HCC. Materials and Methods: We enrolled 50 consecutive patients who 1) prior history of treatment of HCC, 2) underwent liver surgery for radiological/clinical diagnosis of new HCC between 2013 to 2018, 3) had gadoxetic acid enhanced MRI within one month before surgery, and 4) did not have more than five HCCs or infiltrative tumors only. Two radiologists reviewed MRI and determined the presence of LR3, LR4 and LR5 observations except previously treated tumors based on LI-RADS version 2018 in consensus. We sub-classified LR4 into LR4m (LR4 with major features only) and LR4u (LR4 upgraded from LR3 by ancillary features). LR4u were further sub-classified into LR4ua (with arterial phase hyperenhancement) and LR4un (without arterial phase hyperenhancement). Results: PPV for LR5, LR4 and LR3 observations for recurrent HCC were 100%, 61.5% and 25.0%, respectively. 100% (3/3) of LR4m were HCC. However, PPV of LR4u was 56.5%. PPV of LR4ua and LR4un were 73.3% and 25.0%, respectively. Sensitivity of LR5 and LR5+LR4 observations as a diagnostic threshold were 32.1% and 89.3%, respectively. Sensitivity for LR5+LR4m+LR4ua observations for diagnosis of HCC were 83.7% and significantly superior to that of LR5 without significant deterioration of specificity (75.0%). Conclusion: In patients with prior history of HCC, LR4 observations by major features or with APHE may be regarded as recurrent HCCs given high sensitivity and comparable specificity/PPV to LR5 observations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73505,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Investigative magnetic resonance imaging\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Investigative magnetic resonance imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13104/imri.2021.25.3.172\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Investigative magnetic resonance imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13104/imri.2021.25.3.172","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
LI-RADS version 2018 in Patients with Prior History of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Are LR4 Observations Enough for the Diagnosis of Recurrent HCC?
Purpose: We evaluated the diagnostic performance of LI-RADS version 2018 using gadoxetic acid enhanced MRI for recurrent but untreated HCC in patients with prior history of HCC. Materials and Methods: We enrolled 50 consecutive patients who 1) prior history of treatment of HCC, 2) underwent liver surgery for radiological/clinical diagnosis of new HCC between 2013 to 2018, 3) had gadoxetic acid enhanced MRI within one month before surgery, and 4) did not have more than five HCCs or infiltrative tumors only. Two radiologists reviewed MRI and determined the presence of LR3, LR4 and LR5 observations except previously treated tumors based on LI-RADS version 2018 in consensus. We sub-classified LR4 into LR4m (LR4 with major features only) and LR4u (LR4 upgraded from LR3 by ancillary features). LR4u were further sub-classified into LR4ua (with arterial phase hyperenhancement) and LR4un (without arterial phase hyperenhancement). Results: PPV for LR5, LR4 and LR3 observations for recurrent HCC were 100%, 61.5% and 25.0%, respectively. 100% (3/3) of LR4m were HCC. However, PPV of LR4u was 56.5%. PPV of LR4ua and LR4un were 73.3% and 25.0%, respectively. Sensitivity of LR5 and LR5+LR4 observations as a diagnostic threshold were 32.1% and 89.3%, respectively. Sensitivity for LR5+LR4m+LR4ua observations for diagnosis of HCC were 83.7% and significantly superior to that of LR5 without significant deterioration of specificity (75.0%). Conclusion: In patients with prior history of HCC, LR4 observations by major features or with APHE may be regarded as recurrent HCCs given high sensitivity and comparable specificity/PPV to LR5 observations.