Is gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI limited in tumor characterization for patients with chronic liver disease?

Update on the Applications of Radiomics in Diagnosis, Staging, and Recurrence of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

This paper offers an assessment of radiomics tools in the evaluation of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched for papers published in the English language no earlier than October 2022.

RESULTS

We found 236 studies, and 37 satisfied our research criteria. Several studies addressed multidisciplinary topics, especially diagnosis, prognosis, response to therapy, and prediction of staging (TNM) or pathomorphological patterns. In this review, we have covered diagnostic tools developed through machine learning, deep learning, and neural network for the recurrence and prediction of biological characteristics. The majority of the studies were retrospective.

CONCLUSIONS

It is possible to conclude that many performing models have been developed to make differential diagnosis easier for radiologists to predict recurrence and genomic patterns. However, all the studies were retrospective, lacking further external validation in prospective and multicentric cohorts. Furthermore, the radiomics models and the expression of results should be standardized and automatized to be applicable in clinical practice.

Comparison of multiplexed sensitivity encoding and single-shot echo-planar imaging for diffusion-weighted imaging of the liver

PURPOSE

To compare multiplexed sensitivity encoding (MUSE) and conventional diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (cDWI) techniques in liver MRI.

METHODS

Fifty-nine patients who underwent both two-shot echo-planar DWI using MUSE and single-shot echo-planar cDWI at a 3.0-T MRI system were included. Qualitative parameters were independently evaluated by three radiologists, and quantitative parameters were calculated on the basis of region of interest measurements. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and McNemar's test were used to compare solid lesion characterization results and lesion detectability, respectively.

RESULTS

All reviewers found less image noise, sharper liver contours, milder susceptibility artifacts, and better lesion conspicuity in MUSE-DWI than in cDWI (reader average mean, 4.1-4.5 vs. 3.5-4.0; p < 0.05). The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the liver was significantly higher in MUSE-DWI than in cDWI (right lobe: mean, 9.39 vs. 8.10, p < 0.001; left lobe: mean, 8.34 vs. 7.19, p < 0.001), while the SNR of the lesion (mean, 23.72 vs. 23.88, p = 0.911) and lesion-to-liver contrast-to-noise ratio (mean, 14.65 vs. 15.41, p = 0.527) were comparable between MUSE-DWI and cDWI. Solid lesion characterization results were comparably accurate between MUSE-DWI and cDWI (reader average area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.985 vs. 0.986, p = 0.480). The detectability of lesions was better in MUSE-DWI than in cDWI (reader consensus, 83.7 % [41/49] vs. 67.3 % [33/49], p = 0.021).

CONCLUSION

MUSE-DWI can provide multi-shot liver DWI with less noise, fewer distortions, improved SNR of the liver, and better lesion detectability.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Liver Lesion-Initial Characterization

Incidental liver masses are commonly identified on imaging performed for other indications. Since the prevalence of benign focal liver lesions in adults is high, even in patients with primary malignancy, accurate characterization of incidentally detected lesions is of paramount clinical importance. This document reviews utilization of various imaging modalities for characterization of incidentally detected liver lesions, discussed in the context of several clinical scenarios. For each clinical scenario, a summary of current evidence supporting the use of a given diagnostic modality is reported. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Focal lesions in cirrhosis: Not always HCC

Even though most hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC) develop in the setting of cirrhosis, numerous other focal liver lesions and pseudolesions may be encountered. The role of the radiologist is therefore to differentiate these lesions from HCC to avoid under- and overdiagnosis. There are several ways of classifying these lesions: those which predate the development of fibrosis and cirrhosis (cystic lesions, hemangioma), those related to or a consequence of cirrhosis (regenerative nodules, dysplastic nodules, focal fibrosis, peribiliary cysts, shunts, or even cholangiocarcinoma), and those related to the underlying cause of chronic liver disease (lymphoma). Finally, some may develop independently (liver metastases). From an imaging point of view, it is important to remember that the imaging features of pre-existing lesions are not dramatically changed by cirrhosis. Differentiating non-HCC from HCC requires not only an understanding of the multi-step process of hepatocarcinogenesis, but also the importance of medical history, and of complimentary imaging modalities, namely computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This review article gives an overview of the imaging features of benign and malignant non-HCC focal liver lesions in the setting of cirrhosis, with a focus on CT and MR imaging.