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

Risk of Bias in Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System Studies Using QUADAS-2

Purpose: Use a tailored version of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool to evaluate risk of bias and applicability across LIRADS related publications. Method: A tailored QUADAS-2 tool was created through consensus approach to assess risk of bias and applicability across 37 LI-RADS related publications. Studies were selected from 2017 to 2022 using the assistance of experienced hospital librarians to search for studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of CT, MRI, or contrast-enhanced ultrasound for HCC using LI-RADS through multiple different databases. QUADAS-2 assessments were performed in duplicate and independently by 2 authors with experience using the QUADAS-2 tool. Disagreements were resolved with a third expert reviewer. Consensus QUADAS-2 assessments were tabulated for each domain. Results: Using the tailored QUADAS-2 tool, 31 of the 37 included LI-RADS studies were assessed as high risk of bias, and 9 out of 37 studies demonstrated concerns for applicability. Patient selection (21 out of 37 studies) and flow/timing (24 out of 37 studies) domains demonstrated the highest risk of bias. 6 out of 37 studies in the index domain demonstrated high risk of bias. 2 out of 37 studies showed high risk of bias in the reference standard domain. Conclusion: A significant proportion of LI-RADS research is at risk of bias with concerns for applicability. Identifying risk of bias in such research is essential to recognize limitations of a study that may affect the validity of the results. Areas for improvement in LI-RADS research include reducing selection bias, avoiding inappropriate exclusions, and decreasing verification bias.

How to differentiate between combined hepatocellular carcinoma-cholangiocarcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with rim arterial phase hyperenhancement?

PURPOSE

To analyze and compare the differences in MRI features between combined hepatocellular carcinoma-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) with arterial phase peripheral enhancement, so as to provide valuable references for preoperative differential diagnosis.

METHODS

Seventy cHCC-CCA patients and 74 iCCA patients confirmed by pathology were included in this study. Their contrast-enhanced MRI showed rim arterial phase hyperenhancement (Rim APHE). The differences of clinicopathological data and MRI features between cHCC-CCA and iCCA were compared. Then, the sensitivity, specificity, and area under curve (AUC) were also analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

Seventy cHCC-CCA patients (mean age, 55.7 ± 10.6 years) and 74 iCCA patients (mean age, 61.1 ± 10.5 years) were evaluated. In this study, univariable and multivariable regression analysis showed that AFP > 20 ng/ml (OR = 5.824, p = 0.006), enhancing capsule (OR = 7.252, p = 0.001), and mosaic architecture (OR = 32.732, p < 0.001) were independent risk factors of cHCC-CCA with Rim APHE. However, only hepatic capsule retraction (OR = 0.091, p < 0.001) was an independent predictor of iCCA. In addition, combining AFP > 20 ng/ml with enhancing capsule (96.7% vs. 79.2%, p < 0.001) and/or mosaic architecture (96.4% vs. 94.7%, p < 0.001) can improve the sensitivity of differentiating cHCC-CCA (vs. iCCA) with Rim APHE.

CONCLUSION

The combination of elevated AFP and MRI features, such as enhancing capsule and mosaic architecture, will help in preoperative differential diagnosis of cHCC-CCA and iCCA with Rim APHE.

Best Practice for MRI Diagnostic Accuracy Research With Lessons and Examples from the LI-RADS Individual Participant Data Group

Medical imaging diagnostic test accuracy research is strengthened by adhering to best practices for study design, data collection, data documentation, and study reporting. In this review, key elements of such research are discussed, and specific recommendations provided for optimizing diagnostic accuracy study execution to improve uniformity, minimize common sources of bias and avoid potential pitfalls. Examples are provided regarding study methodology and data collection practices based on insights gained by the liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) individual participant data group, who have evaluated raw data from numerous MRI diagnostic accuracy studies for risk of bias and data integrity. The goal of this review is to outline strategies for investigators to improve research practices, and to help reviewers and readers better contextualize a study's findings while understanding its limitations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 3.

Implications of ultrasound-based deep learning model for preoperatively differentiating combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

OBJECTIVES

The current study developed an ultrasound-based deep learning model to make preoperative differentiation among hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), and combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-ICC).

METHODS

The B-mode ultrasound images of 465 patients with primary liver cancer were enrolled in model construction, comprising 264 HCCs, 105 ICCs, and 96 cHCC-ICCs, of which 50 cases were randomly selected to form an independent test cohort, and the rest of study population was assigned to a training and validation cohorts at the ratio of 4:1. Four deep learning models (Resnet18, MobileNet, DenseNet121, and Inception V3) were constructed, and the fivefold cross-validation was adopted to train and validate the performance of these models. The following indexes were calculated to determine the differential diagnosis performance of the models, including sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), F-1 score, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) based on images in the independent test cohort.

RESULTS

Based on the fivefold cross-validation, the Resnet18 outperformed other models in terms of accuracy and robustness, with the overall training and validation accuracy as 99.73% (± 0.07%) and 99.35% (± 0.53%), respectively. Furthers validation based on the independent test cohort suggested that Resnet 18 yielded the best diagnostic performance in identifying HCC, ICC, and cHCC-ICC, with the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, NPV, F1-score, and AUC of 84.59%, 92.65%, 86.00%, 85.82%, 92.99%, 92.37%, 85.07%, and 0.9237 (95% CI 0.8633, 0.9840).

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound-based deep learning algorithm appeared a promising diagnostic method for identifying cHCC-ICC, HCC, and ICC, which might play a role in clinical decision making and evaluation of prognosis.

LI-RADS category 3, 4, and M observations: a multiple parameters diagnostic model for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatic lesions categorized as LR-3, LR-4, and LR-M are challenging to accurately assess and diagnose.

PURPOSE

To combine potential clinical and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features for a more comprehensive hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) versus non-HCC diagnosis for patients with LR-3, LR-4, and LR-M graded lesions.

METHODS

Data were consecutively retrieved from 82 at-risk patients with LR-3 (n = 43), LR-4 (n = 20), and LR-M (n = 23) lesions. Significant findings for the differentiation of HCC and non-HCC, including MRI features and clinical factors, were identified with univariable and multivariable analyses. The variables for a prediction model were selected through stepwise use of Akaike's Information Criterion (AIC) to build multivariable logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) >16.2 ng/mL (odds ratio [OR] = 22.4; P = 0.006), septum (OR = 52.1; P = 0.011), and hepatobiliary phase (HBP) hypointensity (OR = 40.2; P = 0.001) were confirmed as independent predictors of HCC. When combining the three predictors and mild-moderate T2 hyperintensity, the model (AIC = 50.91) showed good accuracy with a C-index of 0.948.

CONCLUSION

In at-risk patients with LR-3, LR-4, or LR-M lesions, integrating AFP, septum, HBP hypointensity, and mild-moderate T2 hyperintensity achieved high diagnostic performance for the diagnosis of HCC.

Differentiation between hepatic angiomyolipoma and hepatocellular carcinoma in individuals who are not at-risk for hepatocellular carcinoma

PURPOSE

To develop a practical methodfor differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from angiomyolipoma (AML) in individuals who are not at-risk for HCC.

METHOD

We retrospectively enrolled consecutive patients who underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and pathological confirmation between January 2008 and April 2022. Patients who underwent prior treatment, those with multiple lesions, or those at-risk for HCC were excluded. The training cohort included patients with pathological confirmation between 2008 and 2019, whereas the validation cohort included the remaining cases. Independent reviews of the MRI were performed by two reviewers. Using the clinical and MRI findings, we developed AML-HCC score using Firth's logistic regression in the training cohort, and the diagnostic performance was validated in the validation cohort.

RESULTS

Of the 206 patients, 156 were assigned to the training cohort (25 and 131 patients with AML and HCC, respectively) and 50 were assigned to the validation cohort (4 and 46 patients with AML and HCC, respectively). The AML-HCC score was defined as the sum of female (score 1), early draining vein (score 2), T2 homogeneity (score 1), necrosis or severe ischaemia (score -2), and HBP hyperintensity to spleen (score -1). When the AML-HCC score was ≥1, the sensitivity and specificity were 80% and 95% for the training cohort and 100% and 80% for the validation cohort, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed and validated an AML-HCC score to differentiate between AML and HCC in individuals who are not at-risk for HCC, and our model demonstrated good diagnostic performance.

Non-invasive imaging in the diagnosis of combined hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma

Combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CC) is a rare type of primary liver cancer. It is a complex "biphenotypic" tumor type consisting of bipotential hepatic progenitor cells that can differentiate into cholangiocytes subtype and hepatocytes subtype. The prognosis of patients with cHCC-CC is quite poor with its specific and more aggressive nature. Furthermore, there are no definite demographic or clinical features of cHCC-CC, thus a clear preoperative identification and accurate non-invasive imaging diagnostic analysis of cHCC-CC are of great value. In this review, we first summarized the epidemiological features, pathological findings, molecular biological information and serological indicators of cHCC-CC disease. Then we reviewed the important applications of non-invasive imaging modalities-particularly ultrasound (US)-in cHCC-CC, covering both diagnostic and prognostic assessment of patients with cHCC-CC. Finally, we presented the shortcomings and potential outlooks for imaging studies in cHCC-CC.

Optimizing CT and MRI criteria for differentiating intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Accurate diagnosis of intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (IMCC) is crucial with regard to the choice of patient management and treatment options.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility and diagnostic performance of the LI-RADS M (LR-M) targetoid criteria on computed tomography (CT) and gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (EOB-MRI) in differentiating IMCC from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 118 patients with IMCC and HCC were included who underwent CT and EOB-MRI examinations. Multivariate analysis was used to determine the strongest predictors differentiating IMCC from HCC. Using these predictors, a predictive model for differentiating IMCC from HCC was constructed and the performance of the model was confirmed using the receiver operating characteristic curve.

RESULTS

Multivariate analyses revealed rim-like arterial phase hyperenhancement (rim APHE) on CT and rim APHE, delayed central enhancement (DCE), and targetoid hepatobiliary phase (HBP) on MRI as independent variables significantly differentiating IMCC from HCC. The multivariate logistic regression model incorporating the three variables on EOB-MRI was constructed with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.946, sensitivity of 87.80%, specificity of 92.21%, and accuracy of 94.60%. Per the DeLong test, the multivariate logistic regression model showed significantly higher AUC than rim APHE on CT (0.946 vs. 0.871; P = 0.008) and MRI (0.946 vs. 0.876; P = 0.003), whereas rim APHE on CT and MRI did not differ significantly (P = 0.809).

CONCLUSION

The multivariate logistic regression model based on rim APHE, DCE, and targetoid HBP on EOB-MRI can effectively distinguish IMCC from HCC and is superior to any other targetoid appearance criterion of LI-RADS on CT and EOB-MRI.

Quantitative Assessment of Hypovascular Component in Arterial Phase to Help the Discrimination of Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma and Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Purpose

To explore the imaging performance for discrimination of combined hepatocellular- cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

In total, 35 patients with cHCC-CCA and a matched control group of HCC patients (n = 35) were included retrospectively. We quantitatively evaluated the hypovascular component in tumor and qualitatively assessed LI-RADS features and other aggressive features to develop model for cHCC-CCA diagnose. Subgroup analyses were performed by tumor size and LI-RADS category.

Results

cHCC-CCA frequently showed a larger proportion (≥50%) of hypovascular areas followed by HCC (P = 0.000). Among those patients with ≥50% hypovascular areas, 8 patients did not present rim enhancement in atrial phase. The LI-RADS major features were more commonly observed in HCC (82.9-45.7%,), than cHCC-CCA (P = 0.003-0.022). The targetoid appearances and non-smooth margin frequently appeared in cHCC-CCA (34.3-63.9%), compared with HCC (P = 0.000-0.023). We developed a radiologic model based on ≥50% hypovascular component and delayed enhancement, which presented AUC of 0.821, accuracy of 80%. We also obtained good performance by radiologic model in LR-M group and tumor size <50mm group (AUC: 0.841 and 0.866, respectively). Combined group which included CA 19-9 and ≥50% hypovascular component and delayed enhancement did not improve the distinction performance between cHCC-CCA and HCC, which presented good performance of identifying cHCC-CCA in the LR-4/5 subgroup and tumor size ≥50 mm subgroup (AUC: 0.717, 0.730, respectively). cHCC-CCA group presented heterogeneous dominant pathology involving 15 of HCC, 7 of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) or cholangiolocellular carcinoma (CLC), 13 of intermediate cells component. Macrotrabecular appearances were higher in cHCC-CCA than that in HCC. The proportion of Hepa-1 was significantly higher in true negative (TN) patients (29 [93.5%]) and false negative (FN) patients (10 [100%]) than in true positive (TP) patients (16 [64%]; P = 0.036).

Conclusion

Quantitative assessment of hypovascular component could help the discrimination of cHCC-CCA. Macrotrabecular appearances were more exhibited in cHCC-CCA than that in HCC.

LI-RADS Version 2018 Targetoid Appearances on Gadoxetic Acid-Enhanced MRI: Interobserver Agreement and Diagnostic Performance for the Differentiation of HCC and Non-HCC Malignancy

BACKGROUND. In LI-RADS version 2018, observations showing at least one of five targetoid appearances in different sequences or postcontrast phases are categorized LR-M, indicating likely non-hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) malignancy. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate interobserver agreement for LI-RADS targetoid appearances among a large number of radiologists of varying experience and the diagnostic performance of targetoid appearances for differentiating HCC from non-HCC malignancy. METHODS. This retrospective study included 100 patients (76 men, 24 women; mean age, 58 ± 9 [SD] years) at high risk of HCC who underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI within 30 days before hepatic tumor resection (25 randomly included patients with non-HCC malignancy [13, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; 12, combined HCC-cholangiocarcinoma]; 75 matched patients with HCC). Eight radiologists (four more experienced [8-15 years]; four less experienced [1-5 years]) from seven institutions independently assessed observations for the five targetoid appearances and LI-RADS categorization. Interobserver agreement and diagnostic performance for non-HCC malignancy were evaluated. RESULTS. Interobserver agreement was poor for peripheral washout (κ = 0.20); moderate for targetoid transitional phase or hepatobiliary phase appearance (κ = 0.33), delayed central enhancement (κ = 0.37), and targetoid restriction (κ = 0.43); and substantial for rim arterial phase hyperenhancement (κ = 0.61). Agreement was fair for at least one targetoid appearance (κ = 0.36) and moderate for at least two, three, or four targetoid appearances (κ = 0.43-0.51). Agreement for individual targetoid appearances was not significantly different between more experienced and less experienced readers other than for targetoid restriction (κ = 0.63 vs 0.43; p = .001). Agreement for at least one targetoid appearance was fair among more experienced (κ = 0.29) and less experienced (κ = 0.37) reviewers. Agreement for at least two, three, or four targetoid appearances was moderate to substantial among more experienced reviewers (κ = 0.45-0.63) and moderate among less experienced reviewers (κ = 0.42-0.56). Existing LR-M criteria of at least one targetoid appearance had median accuracy for non-HCC malignancy of 62%, sensitivity of 84%, and specificity of 54%. For all reviewers, accuracy was highest when at least three (median accuracy, 79%; sensitivity, 68%; specificity, 82%) or four (median accuracy, 80%; sensitivity, 54%; specificity, 88%) targetoid appearances were required. CONCLUSION. Targetoid appearances and LR-M categorization exhibited considerable interobserver variation among both more and less experienced reviewers. CLINICAL IMPACT. Requiring multiple targetoid appearances for LR-M categorization improved interobserver agreement and diagnostic accuracy for non-HCC malignancy.

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

Liver cancer is the sixth most detected tumor and the third leading cause of tumor death worldwide. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver malignancy with specific risk factors and a targeted population. Imaging plays a major role in the management of HCC from screening to post-therapy follow-up. In order to optimize the diagnostic-therapeutic management and using a universal report, which allows more effective communication among the multidisciplinary team, several classification systems have been proposed over time, and LI-RADS is the most utilized. Currently, LI-RADS comprises four algorithms addressing screening and surveillance, diagnosis on computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), diagnosis on contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and treatment response on CT/MRI. The algorithm allows guiding the radiologist through a stepwise process of assigning a category to a liver observation, recognizing both major and ancillary features. This process allows for characterizing liver lesions and assessing treatment. In this review, we highlighted both major and ancillary features that could define HCC. The distinctive dynamic vascular pattern of arterial hyperenhancement followed by washout in the portal-venous phase is the key hallmark of HCC, with a specificity value close to 100%. However, the sensitivity value of these combined criteria is inadequate. Recent evidence has proven that liver-specific contrast could be an important tool not only in increasing sensitivity but also in diagnosis as a major criterion. Although LI-RADS emerges as an essential instrument to support the management of liver tumors, still many improvements are needed to overcome the current limitations. In particular, features that may clearly distinguish HCC from cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) and combined HCC-CCA lesions and the assessment after locoregional radiation-based therapy are still fields of research.

CEUS and CT/MRI LI-RADS in Association With Serum Biomarkers for Differentiation of Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma From Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Background

Combined Hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCAs) are with both unambiguously differentiated hepatocellular and biliary components. cHCC-CCAs show various imaging features similar to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCCs) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICCs), which makes the differential diagnosis between them challenging. The accurate diagnosis of cHCC-CCAs is of great importance in selecting treatment methods and performing patient management.

Purpose

To investigate the diagnostic efficacy of CEUS and CT/MRI LI-RADS in association with tumor biomarkers for differentiation of cHCC-CCAs from HCCs.

Methods

A total of 54 cHCC-CCAs and 55 HCCs in two centers were retrospectively collected. The diagnostic criteria for cHCC-CCAs if one or more of the following conditions were satisfied: (1) arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) on CEUS and LR-M on CT/MRI; (2) LR-5 on both CEUS and CT/MRI with elevated carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9); (3) LR-M on both CEUS and CT/MRI with elevated alphafetoprotein (AFP). The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated.

Results

The rates of APHE and Rim-APHE on CEUS in cHCC-CCAs were 81.5% and 9.3%, respectively. The rate of early and marked washout on CEUS in cHCC-CCAs were 59.3% and 27.8%, respectively. 64.8% and 25.9% of cHCC-CCAs showed APHE and Rim-APHE on CT/MRI, respectively. 46.3% and 35.2% of cHCC-CCAs showed washout and delay enhancement on CT/MRI, respectively. The kappa value of LI-RADS categories of cHCC-CCAs on CEUS and CT/MRI was 0.319 (P=0.008). The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and AUC of the aforementioned diagnostic criteria for cHCC-CCAs were 64.8%, 84.4%, 76.1% and 0.746, respectively.

Conclusion

The combination of the CEUS and CT/MRI LI-RADS with serum tumor markers shows promising diagnostic performance of cHCC-CCAs.

Risk stratification of LI-RADS M and LI-RADS 4/5 combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma: prognostic values of MR imaging features and clinicopathological factors

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the role of clinicopathological factors and MR imaging factors in risk stratification of combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) patients who were classified as LR-M and LR-4/5.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified consecutive patients who were confirmed as cHCC-CCA after surgical surgery in our institution from June 2015 to November 2020. Two radiologists evaluated the preoperative MR imaging features independently, and each lesion was assigned with a LI-RADS category. Preoperative clinical data were also collected. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was applied to separately identify the independent factors correlated with the recurrence of cHCC-CCAs in LR-M and LR-4/5. Risk stratifications were conducted separately in LR-M and LR-4/5. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates and overall survival (OS) rates were analyzed by using the Kaplan-Meier survival curves and log-rank test.

RESULTS

A total of 131 patients with single primary lesion which met the 2019 WHO classification criteria were finally included. Corona enhancement, delayed central enhancement, and microvascular invasion (MVI) were identified as predictors of RFS in LR-M. Mosaic architecture, CA19-9, and MVI were independently associated with RFS in LR-4/5. Based on the number of these independent predictors, patients were stratified into favorable-outcome groups (LR-ML subgroup and LR-4/5L subgroup) and dismal-outcome groups (LR-MH subgroup and LR-4/5H subgroup). The corresponding median RFS for LR-ML, LR-MH, LR-5L, and LR-5H were 25.6 months, 8.2 months, 51.7 months, and 18.1 months.

CONCLUSION

Our study explored the prognostic values of imaging and clinicopathological factors for LR-M and LR-4/5 cHCC-CCA patients, and different survival outcomes were observed among four subgroups after conducting risk stratifications.

KEY POINTS

• Corona enhancement, delayed central enhancement, and MVI were identified as predictors of RFS in cHCC-CCAs which were classified into LR-M. Mosaic architecture, CA19-9, and MVI were independently associated with RFS in cHCC-CCAs which were classified into LR-4/5. • Based on the identified risk factors, LR-M and LR-4/5 cHCC-CCA patients could be stratified into two subgroups respectively, with significantly different RFS and OS. • cHCC-CCA patients from LR-M did not always have worse RFS and OS than those from LR-4/5 in some cases.

CT/MRI and CEUS LI-RADS Major Features Association with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis

Background The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) assigns a risk category for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) to imaging observations. Establishing the contributions of major features can inform the diagnostic algorithm. Purpose To perform a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis to establish the probability of HCC for each LI-RADS major feature using CT/MRI and contrast-enhanced US (CEUS) LI-RADS in patients at high risk for HCC. Materials and Methods Multiple databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus) were searched for studies from January 2014 to September 2019 that evaluated the accuracy of CT, MRI, and CEUS for HCC detection using LI-RADS (CT/MRI LI-RADS, versions 2014, 2017, and 2018; CEUS LI-RADS, versions 2016 and 2017). Data were centralized. Clustering was addressed at the study and patient levels using mixed models. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were determined for each major feature using multivariable stepwise logistic regression. Risk of bias was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) (PROSPERO protocol: CRD42020164486). Results A total of 32 studies were included, with 1170 CT observations, 3341 MRI observations, and 853 CEUS observations. At multivariable analysis of CT/MRI LI-RADS, all major features were associated with HCC, except threshold growth (OR, 1.6; 95% CI: 0.7, 3.6; P = .07). Nonperipheral washout (OR, 13.2; 95% CI: 9.0, 19.2; P = .01) and nonrim arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) (OR, 10.3; 95% CI: 6.7, 15.6; P = .01) had stronger associations with HCC than enhancing capsule (OR, 2.4; 95% CI: 1.7, 3.5; P = .03). On CEUS images, APHE (OR, 7.3; 95% CI: 4.6, 11.5; P = .01), late and mild washout (OR, 4.1; 95% CI: 2.6, 6.6; P = .01), and size of at least 20 mm (OR, 1.6; 95% CI: 1.04, 2.5; P = .04) were associated with HCC. Twenty-five studies (78%) had high risk of bias due to reporting ambiguity or study design flaws. Conclusion Most Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System major features had different independent associations with hepatocellular carcinoma; for CT/MRI, arterial phase hyperenhancement and washout had the strongest associations, whereas threshold growth had no association. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

LR-M Observations on Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound: Detection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Additional Features in Comparison with Current LI-RADS Criteria

Background: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) LI-RADS assigns category LR-M for observations that are definitely or probably malignant but that are not specific on imaging for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A high percentage of LR-M observations represent HCC. Objective: To retrospectively evaluate the utility of additional features, beyond conventional LI-RADS major features, for detecting HCC among LR-M observations on CEUS. Methods: This retrospective study included 174 patients (145 men, 29 women; mean age, 53 years) at high-risk for HCC who underwent CEUS from August 2014 to June 2016, demonstrating an LR-M observation using CEUS LI-RADS version 2017. Two radiologists independently assessed CEUS images for major features and four additional features (chaotic vessels, peripheral circular artery, clear boundary of the tumor enhancement, clear boundary of the intratumoral nonenhanced area). Diagnostic performance was assessed of four proposed criteria for the detection of HCC among LR-M observations. The impact on HCC detection of criteria based on the additional findings was further explored. Histology or composite imaging and clinical follow-up served as reference standard. Results: The 174 LR-M observations included 142 HCCs and 32 non-HCCs (20 intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas, 5 combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinomas, 7 benign lesions). Interreader agreement of the additional features, expressed as kappa, ranged from 0.65 to 0.88. Two of the additional features exhibited PPV ≥95.0% for HCC: chaotic vessels (95.0%) and peripheral circular arteries (98.1%). The presence of either of these two additional features achieved sensitivity of 50.7%, specificity of 90.6%, PPV of 96.0%, and NPV of 29.3% for HCC. Three other explored criteria incorporating variations of major LI-RADS features, but not the additional features, had sensitivities of 55.6%-96.5%, specificities of 49.6%-68.8%, PPVs of 87.8%-90.6%, and NPVs of 25.0%-75.0%. Criteria using additional features recategorized 75 of 174 LR-M observations as LR-5, of which 72 were HCC. Conclusion: The presence of chaotic vessels and/or peripheral circular artery had high specificity and PPV for HCC among LR-M observations. Other explored criteria based on major features did not achieve higher specificity or PPV. Clinical Impact: Clinical adoption of the additional CEUS features could help establish the diagnosis of HCC noninvasively and avoid the need for biopsy of LR-M observations.

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and its differential diagnosis at MRI: how radiologist should assess MR features

BACKGROUND

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is the second most common type of primary hepatic malignancy. Aim of this work is to analyse the features of ICC and its differential diagnosis at MRI, assessing two categories intraparenchymal and peribiliary lesions.

METHODS

The study population included 88 patients with histological diagnosis of ICCs: 61 with mass-forming type, 23 with periductal-infiltrating tumours and 4 with intraductal-growing type. As a control study groups, we identified: 86 consecutive patients with liver colorectal intrahepatic metastases (mCRC) (groups A); 35 consecutive patients with peribiliary metastases (groups B); 62 consecutive patients (groups C) with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); 18 consecutive patients (groups D) with combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA); and 26 consecutive patients (groups E) with hepatic hemangioma. For all lesions, magnetic resonance (MR) features were assessed according to Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018. The liver-specific gadolinium ethoxybenzyl dimeglumine-EOB (Primovist, Bayer Schering Pharma, Germany), was employed. Chi-square test was employed to analyse differences in percentage values of categorical variable, while the nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test was used to test for statistically significant differences between the median values of the continuous variables. However, false discovery rate adjustment according to Benjamin and Hochberg for multiple testing was considered.

RESULTS

T1- and T2-weighted signal intensity (SI), restricted diffusion, transitional phase (TP) and hepatobiliary phase (HP) aspects allowed the differentiation between study group (mass-forming ICCs) and each other control group (A, C, D, E) with statistical significance, while arterial phase (AP) appearance allowed the differentiation between study group and the control groups C and D with statistical significance and PP appearance allowed the differentiation between study group and the control groups A, C and D with statistical significance. Instead, no MR feature allowed the differentiation between study group (periductal-infiltrating type) and control group B.

CONCLUSION

T1 and T2 W SI, restricted diffusion, TP and HP appearance allowed the differentiation between mass-forming ICCs and mimickers with statistical significance, while AP appearance allowed the differentiation between study group and the control groups C and D with statistical significance and PP appearance allowed the differentiation between study group and the control groups A, C and D.

Imaging Features at the Periphery: Hemodynamics, Pathophysiology, and Effect on LI-RADS Categorization

Liver lesions have different enhancement patterns at dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging. The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) applies the enhancement kinetic of liver observations in its algorithms for imaging-based diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in at-risk populations. Therefore, careful analysis of the spatial and temporal features of these enhancement patterns is necessary to increase the accuracy of liver mass characterization. The authors focus on enhancement patterns that are found at or around the margins of liver observations-many of which are recognized and defined by LI-RADS, such as targetoid appearance, rim arterial phase hyperenhancement, peripheral washout, peripheral discontinuous nodular enhancement, enhancing capsule appearance, nonenhancing capsule appearance, corona enhancement, and periobservational arterioportal shunts-as well as peripheral and periobservational enhancement in the setting of posttreatment changes. Many of these are considered major or ancillary features of HCC, ancillary features of malignancy in general, features of non-HCC malignancy, features associated with benign entities, or features related to treatment response. Distinction between these different patterns of enhancement can help with achieving a more specific diagnosis of HCC and better assessment of response to local-regional therapy. ^©RSNA, 2021.

Hepatobiliary phase signal intensity: A potential method of diagnosing HCC with atypical imaging features among LR-M observations

Herein, we assessed whether hepatobiliary phase (HBP) signal intensity (SI) can be used to differentiate HCC and non-HCC malignancies within LR-M observations. 106 LR-M patients based on LI-RADS v2018 who underwent gadoxetate-disodium magnetic resonance imaging and surgery from January 2009 to December 2018 were included. SI of LR-M observation on HBP was analyzed by two radiologists and categorized into dark, low and iso-to-high groups. Tumor was classified as dark when more than 50% of tumor showed hypointensity compared to spleen, as low when more than 50% of tumor showed hyperintensity compared to spleen but hypointensity compared to liver parenchyma, and as iso-to-high if there was even a focal iso-intensity or hyperintensity compared to liver parenchyma. Analysis of clinicopathological factors and association between imaging and histology was performed. Out of 106 LR-M, 42 (40%) were showed dark, 61 (58%) showed low, and 3 (3%) showed iso-to-high SI in HBP. Three iso-to-high SI LR-M were HCCs (P = 0.060) and their major histologic differentiation was Edmondson grade 1 (P = 0.001). 43 out of 61 (71%) low SI LR-M were iCCA or cHCC-CCA (P = 0.002). Inter-reader agreement of HBP SI classification was excellent, with a kappa coefficient of 0.872. LR-M with iso-to-high SI in HBP is prone to being HCC while LR-M with low SI in HBP is prone to being tumor with fibrous stroma such as iCCA and cHCC-CCA. Classification of LR-M based on HBP SI may be a helpful method of differentiating HCC from non-HCC malignancies.

MR Features Based on LI-RADS Ver. 2018 Correlated with Cytokeratin 19 Expression in Combined Hepatocellular Carcinoma-Cholangiocarcinoma

Purpose

To investigate the significance of MR features based on the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS ver. 2018) for identifying the expression of cytokeratin 19 (CK-19) in patients with combined hepatocellular carcinoma-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) before surgery.

Patients and Methods

The study enrolled 174 patients pathologically confirmed to have cHCC-CCA according to the 2019 WHO classification. The preoperative MR imaging features and clinicopathological findings were retrospectively evaluated and compared between the CK-19-positive and CK-19-negative cHCC-CCA groups.

Results

One hundred seventy-four patients (mean age, males vs females: 56.6 ± 10.0 years vs 54.7 ± 14.2 years) were evaluated. The presence of mosaic architecture, targetoid appearance, cholangiectasis, hepatic capsule retraction, and corona enhancement was significantly higher in the CK-19-positive group (all p < 0.05), while nonrim arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) was more common in the CK-19-negative group (p = 0.04). The univariate analysis showed that hepatitis B virus infection, CEA > 5 ng/mL, tumor size, nonrim APHE, mosaic architecture, targetoid appearance, cholangiectasis, hepatic capsule retraction, and corona enhancement were significant risk factors for CK-19-positive cHCC-CCA (all p < 0.05). Unfortunately, the multivariate analysis revealed that only corona enhancement (OR = 2.359, p = 0.03) was an independent risk factor associated with CK-19-positive cHCC-CCA.

Conclusion

Corona enhancement is significantly correlated with CK-19 positivity in patients with cHCC-CCA.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Nonhepatocellular Malignancies in Chronic Liver Disease

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common liver malignancy associated with chronic liver disease. Nonhepatocellular malignancies may also arise in the setting of chronic liver disease. The imaging diagnosis of non-HCC malignancies may be challenging. Non-HCC malignancies in patients with chronic liver disease most commonly include intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma, and less commonly hepatic lymphomas and metastases. On MR imaging, non-HCC malignancies often demonstrate a targetoid appearance, manifesting as rim arterial phase hyperenhancement, peripheral washout, central delayed enhancement, and peripheral restricted diffusion. When applying the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System algorithm, observations with targetoid appearance are categorized as LR-M.

Combined hepatocellular carcinoma-cholangiocarcinoma: MRI features correlated with tumor biomarkers and prognosis

OBJECTIVES

To determine how MRI features are correlated to biomarkers, and to the prognostic factors for recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in combined hepatocellular carcinoma-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) patients.

METHODS

The study enrolled 160 cHCC-CCA patients pathologically confirmed according to the 2019 WHO classification. The preoperative MRI features and clinical data were retrospectively evaluated and compared between patients grouped by AFP or CA19-9 level and with pathological findings. The RFS and OS of cHCC-CCA patients were estimated using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and compared using the log-rank test. Moreover, predictors of RFS and OS were investigated using Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty patients (mean age, males vs. females: 55.7 ± 10.2 years vs. 54.9 ± 14.0 years) were evaluated. The incidence of nodule-in-nodule architecture, mosaic architecture, intratumoral hemorrhage, hepatic capsule retraction, arterial phase peritumoral enhancement, and portal vein thrombus was significantly higher in patients with AFP > 20 ng/ml (all p < 0.05). Multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that age (HR 1.031, p = 0.03), CA19-9 > 37 U/ml (HR 1.880, p = 0.04), arterial phase peritumoral enhancement (HR 2.287, p = 0.01), and delayed enhancement (HR 0.377, p = 0.02) were independent predictors of poor RFS, while arterial phase peripheral enhancement (HR 2.391, p = 0.04) was an independent predictor of poor OS.

CONCLUSIONS

cHCC-CCA imaging features are complex and not correlated with AFP or CA19-9. Age, CA19-9 > 37 U/ml, arterial phase peritumoral enhancement, and delayed enhancement are independent predictors of poor RFS. Arterial phase peripheral enhancement is an independent predictor of poor OS.

KEY POINTS

• The imaging features of combined hepatocellular carcinoma-cholangiocarcinoma are complex and are not correlated with the alpha fetoprotein or CA19-9 levels. • Age, CA19-9 > 37 U/ml, arterial phase peritumoral enhancement, and delayed enhancement are independent predictors of poor recurrence-free survival in combined hepatocellular carcinoma-cholangiocarcinoma patients. • Arterial phase peripheral enhancement is an independent predictor of poor overall survival in patients with combined hepatocellular carcinoma-cholangiocarcinoma.

Comparison of the current guidelines for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma using gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging

OBJECTIVES

To compare the performance of current guidelines applicable to the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) using gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

METHODS

Two hundred and forty-one hepatic lesions (149 HCCs, six other malignancies, 86 benign lesions) in 177 patients at risk of HCC without a history of previous treatment for hepatic malignancy in a tertiary center were retrospectively reviewed. Either histopathology results or long-term (> 24 months) follow-up images were used as a standard of reference. All lesions were categorized according to the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS), European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL), Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL), and Korean Liver Cancer Study Group-National Cancer Center (KLCSG-NCC) guidelines. The sensitivity and specificity thereof were assessed using a generalized estimation equation.

RESULTS

For gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI, LI-RADS (95%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 88-98) and EASL (94%, 95% CI 86-97) yielded the highest specificity, while EASL yielded the lowest sensitivity (54% [95% CI 46-62]). APASL yielded the highest sensitivity (91% [95% CI 86-95]) with the lowest specificity (78% [95% CI 69-86]). KLCSG-NCC showed balanced sensitivity (85% [79-90]) and specificity (88% [95% CI 80-93]). Differences were more prominent in small nodules between 1 and 2 cm.

CONCLUSION

The diagnostic performance of current guidelines for HCC on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI was significantly different, and a potential inverse association between sensitivity and specificity was observed.

KEY POINTS

• EASL and LI-RADS yielded the highest specificity with the lowest sensitivity, whereas APASL yielded the highest sensitivity with the lowest specificity. • Differences in the diagnostic performances of guidelines were prominent in small nodules between 1 and 2 cm. • Additional evaluation of CT findings improved the diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy of EASL and LI-RADS. Although doing so decreased specificity, it remained above 89-90%.

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

PURPOSE

To eliminate the effects of field strength in determining the diagnostic performance of the LI-RADS version 2018 (LI-RADS v2018) in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from non-HCC primary liver malignancy in high-risk patients.

METHODS

Patients who were pathologically confirmed intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) or combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with HCC were matched to the iCCA or cHCC-CCA patients on age, tumor size, MR scanner, and number of tumors. Two readers independently evaluated the lesions according to LI-RADS v2018. Diagnostic performance of LI-RADS v2018 in differentiating HCC from non-HCC primary liver malignancy were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 198 patients with 204 lesions (102 HCCs, 78 iCCAs, and 24 cHCC-CCAs) were enrolled. The sensitivity and specificity of LR-5 or LR-TIV (definitely due to HCC) in diagnosing HCC were 68.63% and 85.29%, respectively. LR-M or LR-TIV (may be due to non-HCC malignancy) had a sensitivity of 72.55% and a specificity of 86.27% in diagnosing non-HCC malignancy. The sensitivity of LR-M or LR-TIV (may be due to non-HCC malignancy) for iCCA and cHCC-CCA was 82.05% and 41.67%, respectively. Nearly half (11/24, 45.83%) of cHCC-CCAs were categorized as LR-5. Three tesla MR showed higher sensitivity than 1.5 T in diagnosing HCC (80.00% vs 57.69%, P = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

When the effect of field strength was eliminated, LI-RADS v2018 demonstrated high specificity but suboptimal sensitivity in distinguishing HCC from non-HCC primary liver carcinomas. Most iCCAs were categorized as LR-M or LR-TIV (may be due to non-HCC malignancy). However, nearly half of cHCC-CCAs were assigned as LR-5.

Clinicopathologic and MRI features of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma in patients with or without cirrhosis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Differences in combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinomas (cHCC-CCAs) arising in high-risk patients with or without liver cirrhosis have not been elucidated. This study aimed to compare the clinicopathologic and imaging characteristics of cHCC-CCAs in patients with or without cirrhosis and to determine the prognostic factors for recurrence-free survival (RFS) after curative resections of single cHCC-CCAs.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 113 patients with surgically resected single cHCC-CCAs who underwent preoperative magnetic resonance imaging from January 2008 to December 2019 at two tertiary referral centres. Clinical, pathologic and imaging features of tumours were compared in high-risk patients with or without cirrhosis. Imaging features were assessed using the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018. RFS and associated factors were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test.

RESULTS

cHCC-CCAs arising from cirrhotic livers had a smaller mean tumour size (2.9 cm vs. 4.5 cm; P < .001) and were more frequently categorized as LR-5 or 4 (41.2% vs. 20.0%; P = .024) than those arising from non-cirrhotic livers. In multivariable analysis, a tumour size of > 3 cm (hazard ratio [HR], 2.081; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.180-3.668; P = .011) and the LR-M category (HR, 2.302; 95% CI, 1.198-4.424; P = .012) were independent predictors associated with worse RFS.

CONCLUSIONS

The tumour size and distribution of LI-RADS categories of cHCC-CCAs differed in high-risk patients with or without cirrhosis. And LR-M category was a worse prognosis predictor after curative resections than LR-5 or 4 category.

Diagnosis of LI-RADS M lesions on gadoxetate-enhanced MRI: identifying cholangiocarcinoma-containing tumor with serum markers and imaging features

OBJECTIVES

The LI-RADS M (LR-M) category describes hepatic lesions probably or definitely malignant, but not specific for hepatocellular carcinoma in at-risk patients. Differentiation among LR-M entities, particularly detecting cholangiocarcinoma-containing tumors (M-CCs), is essential for treatment and prognosis. Thus, we aimed to develop diagnostic models on gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI comprising serum tumor markers and LI-RADS imaging features for M-CC.

METHODS

Consecutive at-risk patients with LR-M lesions exclusively (no co-existing LR-4 and/or LR-5 lesions) were retrieved retrospectively from a prospectively collected database spanning 3 years. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (c-HCC-CCA) were classified together as M-CC. LI-RADS features determined by three independent radiologists and clinically relevant serum tumor markers were used to generate M-CC diagnostic models through logistic regression analysis against histology. Per-patient performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients were included, 42.2% (19/45) with hepatocellular carcinoma, 33.3% (15/45) with ICC, 13.3% (6/45) with c-HCC-CCA, and 11.1% (5/45) with other hepatic lesions. Carbohydrate antigen (CA)19-9 > 38 U/mL, α-fetoprotein (AFP) > 4.8 ng/mL, and absence of the LI-RADS feature "blood products in mass" were significant predictors of M-CC. Combining three predictors demonstrated AUC of 0.862, sensitivity of 76%, and specificity of 88%. The risk of M-CC with all three criteria fulfilled was 98% (AUC, 0.690; sensitivity, 38%; specificity, 100%).

CONCLUSIONS

In at-risk patients with LR-M lesions, integrating CA19-9, AFP, and the LI-RADS feature "blood products in mass" achieved high diagnostic performance for M-CC. When all three criteria were fulfilled, the specificity for M-CC was 100%.

KEY POINTS

• In at-risk patients who had LR-M lesions exclusively (no concomitant LR-4/5 lesions), a model with carbohydrate antigen > 38 U/mL, α-fetoprotein > 4.8 ng/mL, and absence of the LI-RADS feature "blood products in mass" achieved high accuracy for diagnosing cholangiocarcinoma-containing tumors. • In patients of whom all three criteria were fulfilled, the specificity for M-CC was 100%, which might reduce or eliminate the need for biopsy confirmation.

Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Atypical Imaging Features: Review of the Morphologic Hepatocellular Carcinoma Subtypes With Radiology-Pathology Correlation

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fastest growing cause of cancer death in the United States with the incidence rate more than doubling in 20 years. HCC is unique since a noninvasive diagnosis can be achieved with imaging alone when specific clinical criteria and imaging characteristics are met, obviating the need for tissue sampling. However, HCC is a highly heterogeneous neoplasm. Atypical HCC subtypes vary significantly in their morphology, which can be attributed to specific histologic and molecular features, and can cause deviations from the classic imaging characteristics. The different morphologic subtypes of HCC frequently present a diagnostic challenge for radiologists and pathologists since their imaging and pathologic features can overlap with those of non-HCC malignancies. Identifying an atypical subtype can have important clinical implications. Liver transplant, albeit a scarce and limited resource, is the optimal treatment for conventional HCC, potentially curing both the tumor and the underlying pre-malignant condition. Some HCC subtypes as well as mimickers are associated with unacceptably high recurrence and poor outcome after transplant, and there remains limited data on the role and prognosis of liver transplantation for treatment of rare HCC subtypes. Other subtypes tend to recur later than classic HCC, potentially requiring a different follow-up scheme. This review will discuss the appearance of different HCC subtypes in relation to their histopathologic features. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 3.

Update on Pathologic and Radiologic Diagnosis of Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma

Combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) is a malignant primary liver carcinoma characterized by the unequivocal presence of both hepatocytic and cholangiocytic differentiation within the same tumor. Recent research has highlighted that cHCC-CCAs are more heterogeneous than previously expected. In the updated consensus terminology and WHO 2019 classification, "classical type" and "subtypes with stem-cell features" of the WHO 2010 classification are no longer recommended. Instead, it is recommended that the presence and percentages of various histopathologic components and stem-cell features be mentioned in the pathologic report. The new terminology and classification enable the exchange of clearer and more objective information about cHCC-CCAs, facilitating multi-center and multi-national research. However, there are limitations to the diagnosis of cHCC-CCA by imaging and biopsy. cHCC-CCAs showing typical imaging findings of HCC could be misdiagnosed as HCC and subjected to inappropriate treatment, if other clinical findings are not sufficiently considered. cHCC-CCAs showing at least one of the CCA-like imaging features or unusual clinical features should be subjected to biopsy. There may be a sampling error for the biopsy diagnosis of cHCC-CCA. An optimized diagnostic algorithm integrating clinical, radiological, and histopathologic information of biopsy is required to resolve these diagnostic pitfalls.

Combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma: An update on epidemiology, classification, diagnosis and management

BACKGROUND

Combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (CHC) is a rare subtype of primary hepatic malignancies, with variably reported incidence between 0.4%-14.2% of primary liver cancer cases. This study aimed to systematically review the epidemiological, clinicopathological, diagnostic and therapeutic data for this rare entity.

DATA SOURCES

We reviewed the literature of diagnostic approach of CHC with special reference to its clinical, molecular and histopathological characteristics. Additional analysis of the recent literature in order to evaluate the results of surgical and systemic treatment of this entity has been accomplished.

RESULTS

The median age at CHC's diagnosis appears to be between 50 and 75 years. Evaluation of tumor markers [alpha fetoprotein (AFP), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)] along with imaging patterns provides better opportunities for CHC's preoperative diagnosis. Reported clinicopathologic prognostic parameters possibly correlated with increased tumor recurrence and grimmer survival odds include advanced age, tumor size, nodal and distal metastases, vascular and regional organ invasion, multifocality, decreased capsule formation, stem-cell features verification and increased GGT as well as CA19-9 and CEA levels. In case of inoperable or recurrent disease, combinations of cholangiocarcinoma-directed systemic agents display superior results over sorafenib. Liver-directed methods, such as transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI), hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC), radioembolization and ablative therapies, demonstrate inferior efficacy than in cases of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) due to CHC's common hypovascularity.

CONCLUSIONS

CHC demonstrates an overlapping clinical and biological pattern between its malignant ingredients. Natural history of the disease seems to be determined by the predominant tumor element. Gold standard for diagnosis is histology of surgical specimens. Regarding therapeutic interventions, major hepatectomy is acknowledged as the cornerstone of treatment whereas minor hepatectomy and liver transplantation may be applied in patients with advanced cirrhosis. Despite all therapeutic attempts, prognosis of CHC remains dismal.

Prognostic value of LI-RADS category on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI and 18F-FDG PET-CT in patients with primary liver carcinomas

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the postoperative prognostic value of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) category on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET-CT in patients with primary liver carcinomas (PLCs).

METHODS

A total of 189 patients with chronic liver disease and surgically proven single PLC (42 intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas and 21 combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinomas and 126 hepatocellular carcinomas [2:1 matching to non-HCC malignancies]) were retrospectively evaluated with gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI and PET-CT. Two independent reviewers assigned an LI-RADS category for each observation. The tumor-to-liver standardized uptake value ratio (TLR) was calculated. The overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and the associated factors were evaluated.

RESULTS

In multivariable analysis, LI-RADS category (LR-4 or LR-5 [LR-4/5] vs. LR-M; OS, hazard ratio [HR] 2.24, p = 0.006; RFS, HR 1.61, p = 0.028) and TLR (low, < 2.3 vs. high, ≥ 2.3; OS, HR 2.09, p = 0.014; RFS, HR 2.17, p < 0.001) were the independent factors for OS and RFS. For the LR-M group, the high TLR group showed lower OS and RFS rates than the low TLR group (OS, p = 0.008; RFS, p < 0.001). For the LR-4/5 group, the OS and RFS rates were not significantly different between the high TLR and low TLR groups (both p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both LI-RADS category on MRI and TLR on PET-CT are associated with the postoperative prognosis of PLCs. The prognosis of PLCs classified as LR-M can be further stratified according to the TLR group, but not for the PLCs classified as LR-4/5.

KEY POINTS

• The LI-RADS category (LR-4/5 vs. LR-M) and tumor-to-liver standardized uptake value ratio (TLR, low vs. high) were independent factors for postoperative prognosis of primary liver carcinomas (PLCs). • For PLCs classified as LR-M, the TLR group helps stratify the postoperative prognosis of PLCs, with the high TLR group having a poor prognosis and the low TLR group having a better prognosis (p = 0.008 for OS and p < 0.001 for RFS). • For PLCs classified as LR-4/5, the OS and RFS rates were not significantly different between the high TLR and low TLR groups (both p > 0.05).

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

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.

Diagnostic performance of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System in patients at risk of both hepatocellular carcinoma and metastasis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) in patients with both chronic liver disease and a history of extrahepatic malignancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 59 hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) and 45 metastases pathologically confirmed between 2008 and 2017 in 104 patients with chronic liver disease (cirrhosis or chronic hepatitis B) and a history of extrahepatic malignancy. Two radiologists blinded to the final diagnosis independently reviewed MRI (95 patients) or CT (9 patients) images, and their consensus data were used to calculate the diagnostic performance of LI-RADS categories. Serum tumor markers, tumor multiplicity, and suspected metastatic lymph nodes were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of LR-5 for diagnosing HCC were 69% (95% confidence intervals [CI] 56-81), 98% (95% CI 88-99), and 82% (95% CI 73-89), respectively, and those of LR-M for diagnosing metastasis were 89% (95% CI 76-96), 88% (95% CI 77-95), and 88% (95% CI 81-94), respectively. Elevation of serum carcinoembryonic antigen (P = 0.01) or carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels (P = 0.02) and tumor multiplicity (P = 0.004) were more frequently observed in metastasis than in HCC. Three of four metastases categorized as LR-4 or LR-5 were smaller than 2 cm.

CONCLUSIONS

The LI-RADS provides high specificity (98%) for differentiating HCC from metastases in patients with both chronic liver disease and a history of extrahepatic malignancy.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound LI-RADS 2017: comparison with CT/MRI LI-RADS

OBJECTIVE

To compare the classification based on contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) with that of contrast-enhanced CT and MRI (CECT/MRI) LI-RADS for liver nodules in patients at high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma.

METHODS

Two hundred thirty-nine patients with 273 nodules were enrolled in this retrospective study. Each nodule was categorized according to the CEUS LI-RADS version 2017 and CECT/MRI LI-RADS version 2017. The diagnostic performance of CEUS and CECT/MRI was compared. The reference standard was histopathology diagnosis. Inter-modality agreement was assessed with Cohen's kappa.

RESULTS

The inter-modality agreement for CEUS LI-RADS and CECT/MRI LI-RADS was fair with a kappa value of 0.319 (p < 0.001). The positive predictive values (PPVs) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in LR-5, LR-4, and LR-3 were 98.3%, 60.0%, and 25.0% in CEUS, and 95.9%, 65.7%, and 48.1% in CECT/MRI, respectively. The sensitivities and specificities of LR-5 for diagnosing HCC were 75.6% and 93.8% in CEUS, and 83.6% and 83.3% in CECT/MRI, respectively. The positive predictive values of non-HCC malignancy in CEUS LR-M and CECT/MRI LR-M were 33.9% and 93.3%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for diagnosing non-HCC malignancy were 90.9%, 84.5%, and 85.0% in CEUS LR-M and 63.6%, 99.6%, and 96.7% in CECT/MRI LR-M, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The inter-modality agreement of the LI-RADS category between CEUS and CECT/MRI is fair. The positive predictive values of HCCs in LR-5 of the CEUS and CECT/MRI LI-RADS are comparable. CECT/MRI LR-M has better diagnostic performance for non-HCC malignancy than CEUS LR-M.

KEY POINTS

• The inter-modality agreement for the final LI-RADS category between CEUS and CECT/MRI is fair. • The LR-5 of CEUS and CECT/MRI LI-RADS corresponds to comparable positive predictive values (PPVs) of HCC. For LR-3 and LR-4 nodules categorized by CECT/MRI, CEUS examination should be performed, at least if they can be detected on plain ultrasound. • CECT/MRI LR-M has better diagnostic performance for non-HCC malignancy than CEUS LR-M. For LR-M nodules categorized by CEUS, re-evaluation by CECT/MRI is necessary.

Can machine learning radiomics provide pre-operative differentiation of combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma to inform optimal treatment planning?

OBJECTIVE

To differentiate combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CC) from cholangiocarcinoma (CC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) using machine learning on MRI and CT radiomics features.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 85 patients aged 32 to 86 years with 86 histopathology-proven liver cancers: 24 cHCC-CC, 24 CC, and 38 HCC who had MRI and CT between 2004 and 2018. Initial CT reports and morphological evaluation of MRI features were used to assess the performance of radiologists read. Following tumor segmentation, 1419 radiomics features were extracted using PyRadiomics library and reduced to 20 principle components by principal component analysis. Support vector machine classifier was utilized to evaluate MRI and CT radiomics features for the prediction of cHCC-CC vs. non-cHCC-CC and HCC vs. non-HCC. Histopathology was the reference standard for all tumors.

RESULTS

Radiomics MRI features demonstrated the best performance for differentiation of cHCC-CC from non-cHCC-CC with the highest AUC of 0.77 (SD 0.19) while CT was of limited value. Contrast-enhanced MRI phases and pre-contrast and portal-phase CT showed excellent performance for the differentiation of HCC from non-HCC (AUC of 0.79 (SD 0.07) to 0.81 (SD 0.13) for MRI and AUC of 0.81 (SD 0.06) and 0.71 (SD 0.15) for CT phases, respectively). The misdiagnosis of cHCC-CC as HCC or CC using radiologists read was 69% for CT and 58% for MRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate promising predictive performance of MRI and CT radiomics features using machine learning analysis for differentiation of cHCC-CC from HCC and CC with potential implications for treatment decisions.

KEY POINTS

• Retrospective study demonstrated promising predictive performance of MRI radiomics features in the differentiation of cHCC-CC from HCC and CC and of CT radiomics features in the differentiation of HCC from cHCC-CC and CC. • With future validation, radiomics analysis has the potential to inform current clinical practice for the pre-operative diagnosis of cHCC-CC and to enable optimal treatment decisions regards liver resection and transplantation.

Inter-reader agreement and imaging-pathology correlation of the LI-RADS M on gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: efforts to improve diagnostic performance

PURPOSE

To assess image features for diagnosing LR-M in the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018 on gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and evaluate inter-reader agreement and imaging-pathology correlation.

METHODS

A total of 65 patients diagnosed as LR-M who underwent preoperative gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI between September 2016 and March 2019 were included retrospectively. All patients were pathologically confirmed and MR images were reviewed by two radiologists without any information of patient history. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the Chi-square test were used to evaluate inter-reader agreement and imaging-pathology correlation, respectively.

RESULTS

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC, n = 23), intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (CCA, n = 18), metastasis (n = 10), chronic inflammation (n = 7), combined HCC-CCA (n = 5), sarcoma (n = 1), and neuroendocrine tumor (n = 1) were confirmed. Overall ICC values showed near-perfect to substantial agreement (ranges 0.690-0.887). An assessment of a potential imaging-pathology relationship revealed that HCC, CCA, and chronic inflammation were correlated with 'not showing delayed central enhancement' (p = 0.01), 'other feature suggesting non-HCC malignancy (biliary dilatation and liver surface retraction)' (p = 0.03), and 'infiltrative appearance' (p = 0.00). One or more LR-M image features observed together with biliary dilatation or liver surface retraction, suggested CCA as high specificity (89.4%) and diagnostic accuracy (83.1%).

CONCLUSION

Most of the LR-M image features were not correlated with pathologic diagnosis. However, if one or more of the LR-M features were combined with other well-known image features, diagnostic performance of the LR-M could be improved.

LI-RADS M (LR-M) criteria and reporting algorithm of v2018: diagnostic values in the assessment of primary liver cancers on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI

PURPOSE

To evaluate diagnostic values of the liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) M (LR-M) category based on novel explicit criteria that accept both targetoid and nontargetoid LR-M features and the suggested reporting algorithm of LI-RADS v2018 to assess primary liver cancers (PLCs) on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI (Gd-EOB-MRI).

METHODS

This retrospective study included 165 patients at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with pathologically confirmed PLCs (HCC, n = 113; intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma [iCCA], n = 23; and combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma [cHCC-CCA], n = 29). Two radiologists independently analyzed Gd-EOB-MRI features and determined LI-RADS category for each tumor and categorized the likely etiology either as HCC or non-HCC malignancy if LR-M was assigned. Diagnostic performances for HCC or those for malignancy were compared according to imaging criteria.

RESULTS

LR-M was assigned in 95.7%/91.3% of iCCAs; 55.2%/58.6% of cHCC-CCAs; and 21.2%/17.7% of HCCs in reviewers 1/2. Combination of LR-5 plus LR-M resulted in sensitivity of 95.2%/97.6% to diagnose PLCs as malignant, which were significantly higher than that of LR-5 plus "LR-M with ≥ 1 targetoid appearances" (84.8%/91.5%, Ps < 0.01). In comparison to LR-5, LR-5 plus "LR-M of HCC as likely etiology" resulted in significant increase in sensitivity (73.5%/79.6% versus 87.6%/92.9%, Ps < 0.001) but significant decrease in specificity (76.9%/75.0% versus 57.7%/50.0%, P = 0.002 and < 0.001) in the diagnosis of HCC.

CONCLUSION

The LR-M criteria v2018 are useful to differentiate non-HCC malignancies from HCCs and to accurately diagnose PLCs as a malignancy. Reporting the likely etiology in LR-M may facilitate a more sensitive detection of HCC, but along with a considerable decrease in specificity.

Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma: Changes in the 2019 World Health Organization Histological Classification System and Potential Impact on Imaging-Based Diagnosis

Combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) is a primary liver cancer (PLC) with both hepatocytic and cholangiocytic phenotypes. Recently, the World Health Organization (WHO) updated its histological classification system for cHCC-CCA. Compared to the previous WHO histological classification system, the new version no longer recognizes subtypes of cHCC-CCA with stem cell features. Furthermore, some of these cHCC-CCA subtypes with stem cell features have been recategorized as either hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas (ICCs). Additionally, distinctive diagnostic terms for intermediate cell carcinomas and cholangiolocarcinomas (previous cholangiolocellular carcinoma subtype) are now recommended. It is important for radiologists to understand these changes because of its potential impact on the imaging-based diagnosis of HCC, particularly because cHCC-CCAs frequently manifest as HCC mimickers, ICC mimickers, or as indeterminate on imaging studies. Therefore, in this review, we introduce the 2019 WHO classification system for cHCC-CCA, illustrate important imaging features characteristic of its subtypes, discuss the impact on imaging-based diagnosis of HCC, and address other important considerations.

Intraindividual Comparison between Gadoxetate-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Dynamic Computed Tomography for Characterizing Focal Hepatic Lesions: A Multicenter, Multireader Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of dynamic computed tomography (CT) and gadoxetate-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for characterization of hepatic lesions by using the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) in a multicenter, off-site evaluation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective multicenter study, we evaluated 231 hepatic lesions (114 hepatocellular carcinomas [HCCs], 58 non-HCC malignancies, and 59 benign lesions) confirmed histologically in 217 patients with chronic liver disease who underwent both gadoxetate-enhanced MRI and dynamic CT at one of five tertiary hospitals. Four radiologists at different institutes independently reviewed all MR images first and the CT images 4 weeks later. They evaluated the major and ancillary imaging features and categorized each hepatic lesion according to the LI-RADS v2014. Diagnostic performance was calculated and compared using generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

MRI showed higher sensitivity and accuracy than CT for diagnosing hepatic malignancies; the pooled sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies for categorizing LR-5/5V/M were 59.0% vs. 72.4% (CT vs. MRI; p < 0.001), 83.5% vs. 83.9% (p = 0.906), and 65.3% vs. 75.3% (p < 0.001), respectively. CT and MRI showed comparable capabilities for differentiating between HCC and other malignancies, with pooled accuracies of 79.9% and 82.4% for categorizing LR-M, respectively (p = 0.139).

CONCLUSION

Gadoxetate-enhanced MRI showed superior accuracy for categorizing LR-5/5V/M in hepatic malignancies in comparison with dynamic CT. Both modalities had comparable accuracies for distinguishing other malignancies from HCC.

Liver imaging reporting and data system category M: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) category M (LR-M) was introduced to preserve the high specificity of LI-RADS algorithm for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to systematically determine the probability of the LR-M for HCC and non-HCC malignancy, and to determine the sources of heterogeneity between reported results.

METHODS

Original studies reporting the probability of LR-M for HCC and non-HCC malignancy on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were identified in MEDLINE and EMBASE. The meta-analytic pooled percentages of HCC and non-HCC in LR-M were calculated. Meta-regression analysis was performed to explore study heterogeneity. The meta-analytic frequency of each LR-M imaging feature was determined.

RESULTS

We found 10 studies reporting the diagnostic performance of LR-M (1819 lesions in 1631 patients), and six reporting the frequency of LR-M imaging features. The pooled percentages of HCC and non-HCC malignancy for LR-M were 28.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.8%-33.1%; I²  = 83%) and 69.6% (95% CI, 64.6%-74.1%; I²  = 83%) respectively. The study type and MRI scanner field strength were significantly associated with study heterogeneity (P ≤ .04). Of the seven imaging features, rim arterial phase hyperenhancement showed the highest frequency in both non-HCC (48.9%; 95% CI, 43.0%-54.8%) and HCC groups (9.8%; 95% CI, 6.9%-13.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

The LR-M category most commonly included non-HCC malignancy but also included 28.2% of HCC. Substantial study heterogeneity was noted, and it was significantly associated with study type and MRI scanner field strength. In addition, the frequency of LR-M imaging features was variable.

Major and ancillary features according to LI-RADS in the assessment of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma

Background

The aim of the study was to investigate the performance of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018 for combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) identifying the features that allow an accurate characterization.

Patients and methods

Sixty-two patients (median age, 63 years; range, 38–80 years), with pre-surgical biopsy diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that underwent hepatic resection, comprised our retrospective study. All patients were subject to multidetector computed tomography (MDCT); 23 patients underwent to magnetic resonance (MR) study. The radiologist reported the presence of the HCC by using LIRADS v2018 assessing major and ancillary features.

Results

Final histological diagnosis was HCC for 51 patients and cHCC-CCA for 11 patients. The median nodule size was 46.0 mm (range 10–190 mm). For cHCC-CCA the median size was 33.5 mm (range 20–80 mm), for true HCC the median size was 47.5 mm (range 10–190 mm). According to LIRADS categories: 54 (87.1%) nodules as defined as LR-5, 1 (1.6%) as LR-3, and 7 (11.3%) as LR-M. Thirty-nine nodules (63%) showed hyper-enhancement in arterial phase; among them 4 were cHCC-CCA (36.4% of cHCC-CCA) and 35 (68.6%) true HCC. Forty-three nodules (69.3%) showed washout appearance; 6 cHCC-CCAs (54.5% of cHCC-CCA) and 37 true HCC (72.5%) had this feature. Only two cHCC-CCA patients (18.2% of cHCC-CCA) showed capsule appearance. Five cHCC-CCA (71.4% of cHCC-CCA) showed hyperintensity on T2-W sequences while two (28.6%) showed inhomogeneous signal in T2-W. All cHCC-CCA showed restricted diffusion. Seven cHCC-CCA patients showed a progressive contrast enhancement and satellite nodules.

Conclusions

The presence of satellite nodules, hyperintense signal on T2-W, restricted diffusion, the absence of capsule appearance in nodule that shows peripheral and progressive contrast enhancement are suggestive features of cHCC-CCA.

Combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma: which preoperative clinical data and conventional MRI characteristics have value for the prediction of microvascular invasion and clinical significance?

Objectives

To explore which preoperative clinical data and conventional MRI findings may indicate microvascular invasion (MVI) of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) and have clinical significance.

Methods

The study enrolled 113 patients with histopathologically confirmed cHCC-CCA (MVI-positive group [n = 56], MVI-negative group [n = 57]). Two radiologists retrospectively assessed the preoperative MRI features (qualitative analysis of morphology and dynamic enhancement features), and each lesion was assigned according to the LI-RADS. Preoperative clinical data were also evaluated. Logistic regression analyses were used to assess the relative value of these parameters as potential predictors of MVI. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates after hepatectomy in the two groups were estimated using Kaplan–Meier survival curves and compared using the log-rank test.

Results

The majority of cHCC-CCAs were categorized as LR-M. On multivariate analysis, a higher serum AFP level (OR, 0.523; 95% CI, 0.282–0.971; p = 0.040), intratumoral fat deposition (OR, 14.368; 95% CI, 2.749–75.098; p = 0.002), and irregular arterial peritumoral enhancement (OR, 0.322; 95% CI, 0.164–0.631; p = 0.001) were independent variables associated with the MVI of cHCC-CCA. After hepatectomy, patients with MVI of cHCC-CCA showed earlier recurrence than those without MVI (hazard ratio [HR], 0.402; 95% CI, 0.189–0.854, p = 0.013).

Conclusion

A higher serum AFP level and irregular arterial peritumoral enhancement are potential predictive biomarkers for the MVI of cHCC-CCA, while intratumoral fat detected on MRI suggests a low risk of MVI. Furthermore, cHCC-CCAs with MVI may have worse surgical outcomes with regard to early recurrence than those without MVI.

Key Points

• Higher serum levels of AFP combined with irregular arterial peritumoral enhancement are independent risk factors for the MVI of cHCC-CCA, while fat deposition might be a protective factor.

• cHCC-CCA with MVI may have a higher risk of early recurrence after surgery.

• Most cHCC-CCAs were categorized as LR-M in this study, and no significant difference was found in MVI based on LI-RADS category.

Combining imaging and tumour biopsy improves the diagnosis of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) is by definition a highly heterogeneous tumour, which significantly impacts its diagnosis. The aim of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of imaging using computed tomography and/or magnetic resonance (MR) and biopsy for the diagnosis of cHCC-CCA.

METHODS

cHCC-CCA resected between December 2006 and April 2017 with available pre-operative imaging and tumour biopsy were retrospectively included. cHCC-CCA diagnosis was based on morphological and immunophenotypical features. A total of 21 cHCC-CCA were compared to 21 intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) as controls. All biopsies were reviewed. Two radiologists reviewed the cases and classified tumours into four patterns (type 1 [progressive enhancement of the entire lesion, iCCA type], type 2 [arterial enhancement with washout, HCC type], type 3 [mixed pattern with combinations of 1, 2 and 4] and type 4 [atypical pattern, areas of arterial enhancement without washout and/or hypovascular]).

RESULTS

The presence of a type 3 pattern at imaging had a 48% sensitivity and 81% specificity for cHCC-CCA diagnosis. The initial diagnosis performed on biopsy was cHCC-CCA in 8/21 patients (38%). After reviewing and including immunophenotypical markers, two more cases were diagnosed as cHCC-CCA (48% sensibility, 100% specificity). When either imaging or biopsy suggested the diagnosis of cHCC-CCA, the sensitivity and specificity were 60% and 82% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We showed that a two-step strategy combining imaging as the first step and biopsy as the second step improved the diagnostic performance of cHCC-CCA.

The interreader agreement and validation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound liver imaging reporting and data system

PURPOSE

This study explored the interreader agreement and diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound liver imaging reporting and data system (CEUS LI-RADS).

METHODS

Between January 2014 and December 2017, 1366 patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who underwent CEUS were included in this retrospective study. Four ultrasound physicians rated the HCC likelihood of focal liver lesions (FLLs) using CEUS LI-RADS v2017. Interreader agreement on CEUS LI-RADS categories and major features (arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE), washout appearance) were assessed using weighted kappa statistics (κ). Diagnostic performance was described by sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV, +LR, -LR.

RESULTS

The interreader agreement (κ) for CEUS LI-RADS categories, APHE, and washout appearance ranged from 0.61 to 0.73, 0.65 to 0.83, and 0.58 to 0.71, respectively. Interreader agreement for LI-RADS categories and APHE were almost substantial between FLLs <2 cm, ≥2 cm, <5 cm; interreader agreement for major features were fair to substantial for FLLs ≥5 cm. The accuracy, PPV and + LR for HCC and malignancy in FLLs <2 cm, ≥2 cm, <5 cm, ≥5 cm were high, with values of 84.7% to 91.9%, 90.2% to 94.2%, and 2.2 to 8.0, respectively. CEUS LI-RADS had the highest specificity for HCC (90.2%) and malignancy (90.9%) diagnosis for FLLs <2 cm and <5 cm, respectively; specificity was lowest for HCC (54.7%) and malignancy (68.3%) diagnosis for FLLs ≥5 cm.

CONCLUSIONS

CEUS LI-RADS is a good standardized categorization system for high-risk patients, and the combination of two or three LR-M features may improve the true-negative classification of HCC diagnosis.