Cited 0 times in
Abbreviated MRI with optional multiphasic CT as an alternative to full-sequence MRI: LI-RADS validation in a HCC-screening cohort
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Park, SH | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kim, B | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kim, SY | - |
dc.contributor.author | Shim, YS | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kim, JH | - |
dc.contributor.author | Huh, J | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kim, HJ | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kim, KW | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lee, SS | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-10-24T05:53:28Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2022-10-24T05:53:28Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0938-7994 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://repository.ajou.ac.kr/handle/201003/22313 | - |
dc.description.abstract | OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic performance of abbreviated MRI (AMRI) combined with multiphasic CT (mCT) with that of full-sequence gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI (EOB-MRI) in a hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)-screening cohort METHODS: Consecutive patients at risk of HCC who underwent EOB-MRI and mCT within 3 months for evaluation of new 0.5-3-cm hepatic observations were retrospectively recruited from 3 centers. An AMRI protocol comprising hepatobiliary phase, T2- and diffusion-weighted imaging, and dual-echo sequence was reconstituted from EOB-MRI. Two radiologists independently reviewed each observation in AMRI plus mCT (set 1) and EOB-MRI (set 2) per LI-RADS v2018. Per-lesion sensitivity, accuracy, and positive predictive value (PPV) for HCC were calculated and compared between image sets.
RESULTS: In 267 patients, 306 histologically confirmed observations (280 HCCs, 20 combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinomas, 1 cholangiocarcinoma, and 5 benignities) were assessed. Set 1 yielded higher sensitivity (96.4% vs. 92.9%, p = 0.013) and comparable accuracy (91.2% vs. 87.6%) and PPV (94.1% vs. 93.5%) to set 2 using LI-RADS category (LR)-4/5 criteria. The sets showed comparable sensitivity (66.4% vs. 70.4%), accuracy (67.7% vs. 70.6%), and PPV (97.4% vs. 96.6%) using LR-5 criteria. A similar substantial number of non-HCC malignancies were categorized as LR-4 or LR-5, as was the number of HCCs categorized as LR-M in both sets. CONCLUSIONS: AMRI combined with mCT showed diagnostic performance similar or superior to that of EOB-MRI for HCC diagnosis using LI-RADS. Therefore, mCT holds potential as a sequential examination for HCC diagnosis in AMRI-detected hepatic observation in patients at risk of HCC. KEY POINTS: • AMRI plus multiphasic CT showed comparable accuracy (91.2%) and PPV (94.1%) to full-sequence gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI using LR-4/5 criteria. • AMRI plus multiphasic CT was significantly more sensitive than full-sequence gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI (96.4% vs. 92.9%) using LR-4/5 criteria. • Multiphasic CT is a potential sequential modality for HCC diagnosis after AMRI. | - |
dc.language.iso | en | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Algorithms | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Carcinoma, Hepatocellular | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Female | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Humans | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Liver | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Liver Neoplasms | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Male | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Middle Aged | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Multidetector Computed Tomography | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Retrospective Studies | - |
dc.title | Abbreviated MRI with optional multiphasic CT as an alternative to full-sequence MRI: LI-RADS validation in a HCC-screening cohort | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 31858203 | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Hepatocellular carcinoma | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Liver | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Magnetic resonance imaging | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | Kim, B | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | Huh, J | - |
dc.type.local | Journal Papers | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s00330-019-06546-5 | - |
dc.citation.title | European radiology | - |
dc.citation.volume | 30 | - |
dc.citation.number | 4 | - |
dc.citation.date | 2020 | - |
dc.citation.startPage | 2302 | - |
dc.citation.endPage | 2311 | - |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | European radiology, 30(4). : 2302-2311, 2020 | - |
dc.embargo.liftdate | 9999-12-31 | - |
dc.embargo.terms | 9999-12-31 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1432-1084 | - |
dc.relation.journalid | J009387994 | - |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.