Value of Conventional Ultrasound-based Scoring System in Distinguishing Adenomatous Polyps From Cholesterol Polyps

Interpretation, Reporting, Imaging-Based Workups, and Surveillance of Incidentally Detected Gallbladder Polyps and Gallbladder Wall Thickening: 2025 Recommendations From the Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology

Incidentally detected gallbladder polyps (GBPs) and gallbladder wall thickening (GBWT) are frequently encountered in clinical practice. However, characterizing GBPs and GBWT in asymptomatic patients can be challenging and may result in overtreatment, including unnecessary follow-ups or surgeries. The Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology (KSAR) Clinical Practice Guideline Committee has developed expert recommendations that focus on standardized imaging interpretation and follow-up strategies for both GBPs and GBWT, with support from the Korean Society of Radiology and KSAR. These guidelines, which address 24 key questions, aim to standardize the approach for the interpretation of imaging findings, reporting, imaging-based workups, and surveillance of incidentally detected GBPs and GBWT. This recommendation promotes evidence-based practice, facilitates communication between radiologists and referring physicians, and reduces unnecessary interventions.

Gallbladder polypoid lesions: Current practices and future prospects

ABSTRACT

Gallbladder polypoid lesions (GPLs) refer to any elevated lesion of the mucosal surface of the gallbladder wall, and the prevalence is estimated to be between 0.9% and 12.1%. GPLs include benign polyps and malignant polyps. Benign polyps are further classified as non-neoplastic polyps and neoplastic polyps. Cholesterol polyps are the most common benign polyps and adenocarcinoma is the main type of malignant polyp. Hepatitis B virus infection, liver function abnormalities, dyslipidemia, and obesity are the main risk factors for GPLs. Studies of biological mechanisms have focused on malignant gallbladder polyps, the development of which is regulated by hormone levels in vivo , gut microbiota, inflammation, oxidative stress, Salmonella typhimurium , and related molecules. Diagnostic modalities include chemical examination and imaging examination, with imaging examination currently being the mainstay. Treatment of patients with GPLs is based on the presence or absence of symptoms, age, size of the polyps, tendency of the polyp to increase, and risk factors for symptomatic malignancy to determine whether surgery should be performed.

Risk stratification model for incidentally detected gallbladder polyps: A multicentre study

PURPOSE

We aimed to develop a 4-level risk stratification model using a scoring system based on conventional ultrasound to improve the diagnosis of gallbladder polyp.

METHOD

Patients with histopathologically confirmed gallbladder polyps were consecutively recruited from three medical centres. Conventional ultrasound findings and clinical characteristics were acquired prior to cholecystectomy. Risk factors for neoplastic and malignant polyps were used to build a risk stratification system via interobserver agreement and multivariate logistic regression analysis. The model was retrospectively trained using 264 pre-surgical samples and prospectively validated using 106 pre-surgical samples. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and malignant polyp rate.

RESULTS

In total, 370 patients (mean age, 51.68 ± 14.41 years, 156 men) were enrolled in this study. Size (≥12 mm), shape (oblate or round), single, vascularity, gallbladder stone or sludge were considered risk factors for neoplastic polyps. Size (≥14 mm), shape (oblate), single, disrupted gallbladder wall, and gallbladder stone or sludge were risk factors for malignant polyps (all p < 0.05). In the scoring system, the sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of score ≥ 9 in diagnosing neoplastic polyps were 0.766, 0.788, and 0.876 respectively; and the sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of score ≥ 15 in diagnosing malignant polyps were 0.844, 0.926, and 0.949 respectively. In our model, the malignancy rates at the four levels were 0 % (0/24), 1.28 % (2/156), 9.26 % (5/54), and 70.37 % (38/54), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The 4-level risk stratification model based on conventional ultrasound imaging showed excellent performance in classifying gallbladder polyps.

Value of Micro Flow Imaging in the Prediction of Adenomatous Polyps

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the value of micro flow imaging (MFI) in distinguishing adenomatous polyps from cholesterol polyps.

METHODS

A total of 143 patients who underwent cholecystectomy for gallbladder polyps were retrospectively analyzed. B-mode ultrasound (BUS), color Doppler flow imaging (CDFI), MFI and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) were performed before cholecystectomy. The weighted kappa consistency test was used to evaluate the agreement of vascular morphology among CDFI, MFI and CEUS. Ultrasound image characteristics, including BUS, CDFI and MFI images, were compared between adenomatous polyps and cholesterol polyps. The independent risk factors for adenomatous polyps were selected. The diagnostic performance of MFI combined with BUS in determining adenomatous polyps was compared with CDFI combined with BUS.

RESULTS

Of the 143 patients, 113 cases were cholesterol polyps, and 30 cases were adenomatous polyps. The vascular morphology of gallbladder polyps was more clearly depicted by MFI than CDFI, and it had better agreement with CEUS. Differences in maximum size, height/width ratio, hyperechoic spot and vascular intensity on CDFI and MFI images were significant between adenomatous polyps and cholesterol polyps (p < 0.05). The maximum size, height/width ratio, and vascular intensity on MFI images were independent risk factors for adenomatous polyps. For MFI combined with BUS, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 90.00%, 94.69% and 93.70%, respectively. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of MFI combined with BUS was significantly higher than that of CDFI combined with BUS (AUC = 0.923 vs. 0.784).

CONCLUSION

Compared with CDFI combined with BUS, MFI combined with BUS had higher diagnostic performance in determining adenomatous polyps.