Metastasis Versus Focal Eosinophilic Infiltration of the Liver in Patients With Extrahepatic Abdominal Cancer: An Evaluation With Gadobenate Dimeglumine-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Differentiating Between an Atypical Hepatic Abscess and Tumor Metastasis Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Hepatobiliary Phase Imaging

Objective

To identify diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) patterns and conspicuity discrepancies on hepatobiliary phase imaging (HBPI) to distinguish atypical hepatic abscesses from hepatic metastases.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study recruited 31 patients with 43 atypical hepatic abscesses and 32 patients with 35 hepatic metastases who underwent gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. All lesions were confirmed by pathological or clinical diagnosis. For the qualitative and quantitative analyses, the signal intensity, DWI pattern, apparent diffusion coefficient, degree of perilesional edema, perilesional hyperemia, perilesional signal on HBPI, conspicuity, size discrepancy between sequences, contrast-to-noise ratio, signal-to-noise ratio, and relative enhancement ratio on dynamic phases were independently assessed by two radiologists. Significant findings for differentiating the two groups were identified via univariate and multivariate analyses with a nomogram for predicting atypical hepatic abscesses. The interobserver agreement was also analyzed for each variable.

Results

The multivariate analysis revealed that the conspicuity discrepancy (odds ratio [OR] 34.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.09–579.47, p = 0.013) and non-peripheral high signal intensity (SI) rim on DWI (OR 67.46, 95% CI 2.64, 1723.20, p = 0.011) were significant independent factors for predicting atypical hepatic abscesses. They were also shown to be high predictor points on the nomogram. When any of the set criteria were satisfied, 97.7% of atypical hepatic abscesses were correctly identified, with a specificity of 65.7%. When both criteria were combined, the specificity was up to 100%, with a sensitivity of 44.9%.

Conclusion

Conspicuity discrepancy and a non-peripheral high SI rim on DWI are reliable and meaningful features that can distinguish atypical hepatic abscesses from hepatic metastases.

Differentiation of hepatic abscess from metastasis on contrast-enhanced dynamic computed tomography in patients with a history of extrahepatic malignancy: emphasis on dynamic change of arterial rim enhancement

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the study is to identify computed tomography (CT) findings that differentiate hepatic abscess from hepatic metastasis in a patient with a history of extrahepatic malignancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 30 patients with 93 hepatic abscesses and 40 patients with 125 hepatic metastases who had a history of extrahepatic malignancy and underwent contrast-enhanced dynamic CT with arterial phase (AP) and portal venous phase (PVP). The diagnosis of hepatic abscess and hepatic metastasis was made using pathological confirmation or clinical diagnosis. Margin, patchy parenchymal enhancement, arterial rim enhancement, dynamic change of arterial rim enhancement, size discrepancy of lesions between arterial and portal phases, bile duct dilatation, perilesional hyperemia, and perilesional low density were evaluated by two radiologists independently. Significant findings for differentiating two groups were identified at univariate and multivariate analysis with nomogram for predicting hepatic abscess. Interobserver agreement was also analyzed for each variable.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis revealed that patchy parenchymal enhancement (P < 0.001), arterial rim enhancement persistent through PVP (P < 0.001), and perilesional hyperemia (P = 0.013) were independent significant findings to predict hepatic abscess than metastasis. Among them, arterial rim enhancement persistent through PVP showed a highest odds ratio (OR 33.73) on multivariate analysis and a highest predictor point on a nomogram for predicting hepatic abscess. When two of these three criteria were combined, 80.7% (75/93) of hepatic abscess were correctly identified, with a specificity of 85.6% (107/125). When all three criteria were satisfied, specificity was up to 100% (125/125).

CONCLUSIONS

At contrast-enhanced dynamic CT, patchy parenchymal enhancement, arterial rim enhancement persistent through PVP, perilesional hyperemia, and their combinations may be reliable CT features for differentiating hepatic abscess from metastasis in patients with a history of primary extrahepatic malignancy.

The value of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for differentiation between hepatic microabscesses and metastases in patients with periampullary cancer

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to identify features that differentiate hepatic microabscess from hepatic metastasis on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI in patients with periampullary cancer.

METHODS

We included 72 patients (31 patients with 83 hepatic microabscesses and 41 patients with 71 hepatic metastases) who had a history of periampullary cancer and underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. Image analysis was performed for margin, signal intensity, rim enhancement, perilesional hyperaemia, pattern on DWI and dynamic phases, and size discrepancy between sequences by consensus of two observers.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis revealed that the following significant parameters favour microabscess: a history of bile duct cancer, perilesional hyperaemia, persistent arterial rim enhancement through the transitional phase (TP), and size discrepancy between T1WI and T2WI and between T1WI and hepatobiliary phase image (HBPI). The diagnostic accuracy for microabscess was highest (90.9%) when showing a size discrepancy ≥30% between T1WI and HBPI or persistent arterial rim enhancement through the TP. When the lesion was positive for both these variables, specificity reached 100%.

CONCLUSION

The combination of a size discrepancy between T1WI and HBPI and persistent arterial rim enhancement through the TP represents a reliable MRI feature for distinguishing between hepatic microabscess and metastasis in patients with periampullary cancer.

KEY POINTS

• Gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI is useful for distinguishing hepatic microabscess from metastasis. • Hepatic microabscess showed significant size discrepancy ≥30% between T1WI and HBPI. • Arterial rim enhancement persistent through the TP indicates hepatic microabscess.

Use of hepatobiliary phase images in Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI of breast cancer hepatic metastasis to predict response to chemotherapy

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prognostic value of Gd-EOB-DTPA MRI findings of liver metastasis from breast cancer.

METHODS

29 metastatic lesions from 12 breast cancer patients who received chemotherapy were retrospectively reviewed. We evaluated hepatobiliary phase of the lesions and classified them as a "target" or "non-target" appearance. The relationship of appearance or SI ratio with tumor response was analyzed.

RESULTS

A non-target appearance was more frequent in disease control group than in non-control group [14/18 (77.8%) vs. 4/18 (22.2%)], and it was associated with a better response [p=0.048].

CONCLUSION

HBP analysis may be useful to predict the response to chemotherapy and survival.

Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for non-neoplastic conditions in the hepatobiliary and pancreatic regions: pearls and potential pitfalls in imaging interpretation

Potentially, diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) can assess the functional information on concerning the status of tissue cellularity, because increased cellularity is associated with impeded diffusion. DWI in the hepatobiliary and pancreatic regions has demonstrated the usefulness to detect malignant lesions and differentiate them from benign lesions. However, it has been shown more recently that there is some overlap in ADC values for benign and malignant neoplasms. Moreover, some non-neoplastic lesions in the hepatobiliary and pancreatic regions exhibit restricted diffusion on DWI, because of pus, inflammation, or high cellularity. Focal eosinophilic liver disease, hepatic inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor, granulomatous liver disease, acute cholecystitis, xanthogranulomatous cholecystitis, focal pancreatitis, or autoimmune pancreatitis frequently exhibit restricted diffusion on DWI, which may be confused with malignancy in the hepatobiliary and pancreatic regions. Thus, DWI should not be interpreted in isolation, but in conjunction with other conventional images, to avoid the diagnostic pitfalls of DWI. Nevertheless, the presence of diffusion restriction in the non-neoplastic lesions sometimes provides additional information regarding the diagnosis, in problematic patients where conventional images have yielded equivocal findings. DWI may help differentiate hepatic abscess from malignant necrotic tumors, gallbladder empyema from dense bile or sludge in the gallbladder, and pylephlebitis from bland thrombosis in the portal vein. Therefore, knowledge of DWI findings to conventional imaging findings of diffusion-restricted non-neoplastic conditions in the hepatobiliary and pancreatic regions helps establishing a correct diagnosis.

Gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0T MRI for the evaluation of hepatic metastasis from colorectal cancer: metastasis is not always seen as a "defect" on the hepatobiliary phase

PURPOSE

To determine specific imaging features of hepatic metastasis from colorectal cancer, focusing on the hepatobiliary phase (HBP) of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Over a 2-year period, 79 hepatic metastatic lesions were identified from 32 patients (22 men and 10 women) who proven colorectal cancer and underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0T MRI. Hepatic metastases were proven pathologically in 16 patients: by surgical liver resection (n=14) and by US-guided biopsy (n=2). The remaining 16 patients were considered to have hepatic metastasis based on imaging studies and clinical information. Two radiologists evaluated the imaging features of each MRI sequence, including high resolution T2WI, dynamic contrast enhancement study with hepatobiliary phase, and diffusion weighted image. We also compared SI of the lesions on T2WI and HBP.

RESULTS

T2WI showed homogeneous high SI (n=25; 31.7%), target appearance (n=3; 3.8%), reversed target appearance (n=2; 2.6%), and heterogeneously high SI (n=49; 62%). On HBP, homogeneous defect were seen in 22 lesions (27.9%), target appearance in five lesions (6.4%), reversed target appearance in two lesions (2.5%), and heterogeneous defect in 50 lesions (63.3%); including reticular (70%), partially globular (26%), and diffuse GGO-like (4%) patterns. According to the imaging features on HBP, the homogeneous defect and heterogeneous defect groups had a mean ADC value of 0.99 × 10(-3) and 1.07 × 10(-3)mm(2)/s, respectively, without statistically significant difference.

CONCLUSION

Hepatic metastasis from colorectal cancer usually showed as a heterogeneous defect on HBP and a heterogeneous high SI on T2WI. The generally accepted "true defect" was not a common finding in hepatic metastasis from colorectal cancer.

Paradoxical uptake of Gd-EOB-DTPA on the hepatobiliary phase in the evaluation of hepatic metastasis from breast cancer: is the "target sign" a common finding?

PURPOSE

The purpose was to describe magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of breast cancer liver metastasis using gadoxetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA) with an emphasis on the added value of the hepatobiliary phase (HBP).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Nine patients with 13 liver metastases were included in the study after the medical records of 29 breast cancer patients who underwent Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI between February 2008 and June 2010 were reviewed. The diagnoses of liver metastasis were established by percutaneous liver biopsy or surgery and on the basis of image findings. Two radiologists retrospectively evaluated signal intensity (SI) and sizes of metastases and patterns of enhancement in an HBP. The SI ratio was calculated as the SI of the central hyperintense portion in "target" lesions divided by the SI of nearby normal liver parenchyma on the HBP. We also measured apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values from Diffusion Weighted Image (DWI).

RESULTS

Liver metastases were all hypointense [n=13/13 (100%)] on T1-weighted imaging (WI), and many lesions had a "target" appearance with a central high SI and a peripheral low SI rim (47%) on T2WI. Dynamic study showed rim enhancement on the arterial phase (85%) and a "target" appearance, consisting of a central enhancing portion with peripheral washout or hypointense rim, on the HBP (62%). The mean SI ratio was 0.7. The mean ADC value of "target" appearing metastases was 1.25 (×10(-3) mm(2)/s; range 1.3-1.6) compared with a mean value of 0.8 (×10(-3) mm(2)/s; range 0.8-1.4) in homogeneous defect on the HBP. There was statistically significant difference (P<.05).

CONCLUSION

Breast cancer liver metastases commonly demonstrated as a peripheral ring enhancement on arterial dominant phase and a target sign with a central round enhancing portion and a peripheral hypointense rim on the HBP.

Differentiating focal eosinophilic infiltration from metastasis in the liver with gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging

Objective

To determine the most useful findings of gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0 Tesla (T) MRI for differentiating focal eosinophilic infiltration (FEI) from hepatic metastasis with verification of their usefulness.

Materials and Methods

Pathologically or clinically proven 39 FEIs from 25 patients and 79 hepatic metastases from 51 patients were included in the study. Gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0T MRI was performed in all cancer patients. Size differences measured between T2-weighted and hepatobiliary-phase images for lesions > 1 cm and morphologic findings (margin, shape, signal intensity on T1- and T2-weighted images, enhancement pattern on dynamic images, and target appearance on hepatobiliary-phase images) were compared between two groups via Student's t test as well as univariate and multivariate analyses. Diagnostic predictive values of two observers for differentiating two groups were assessed before (session 1) and after (session 2) recognition of results.

Results

Mean size difference (2.1 mm) in FEIs between the two images was significantly greater than for metastases (0.7 mm) (p < 0.05). An ill-defined margin and isointensity on T1-weighted images were independently significant morphologic findings (p < 0.05) for differentiating the two groups. All observers achieved a higher diagnostic accuracy in session 2 (97% and 98%) than session 1 (92% and 89%) with statistical significance in observer 2 (p < 0.05). All observers had significantly higher sensitivities (95%) and negative predictive values (NPVs) (98%) in session 2 than in session 1 (sensitivity, 74% in two observers; NPV, 89% and 88%) (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

With the size change, an ill-defined margin and isointensity on T1-weighted images are the most useful findings for differentiating FEI from hepatic metastasis on gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0T MRI.

Focal eosinophilic infiltration of the liver: gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging

OBJECTIVES

Using gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), the purpose of this study was to evaluate findings of focal hepatic eosinophilic infiltration.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 8 patients with 7 histologically confirmed focal eosinophilic infiltration (FEI) of the liver. One case was considered as FEI by using clinical findings and follow-up imaging. Gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI and DWI were reviewed by 2 radiologists. We evaluated the signal intensity of focal lesions on T1-weighted, T2-weighted, and DW images and the pattern of enhancement in arterial, portal, equilibrium, and hepatobiliary phases of the gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value for focal eosinophilic infiltration was also calculated.

RESULTS

On T2-weighted images, 7 (88%) of 8 cases (7/8 lesions) showed mixed hyperintensity with irregular margins. Six (75%) of the 8 cases showed rim enhancement in the arterial phase. Most cases (5/8 lesions [63%]) showed isointensity or hypointensity in the portal and equilibrium phases. In the hepatobiliary phase, all cases (8/8) showed mixed hypointensity with irregular margins and nonspherical shapes. All cases showed hyperintensity in both low and high b-value ranges on DWI. The ADCs for 6 cases showed less than 1.05 × 10(-3) mm2/s (0.74 × 10(-3) to 1.03 × 10(-3) mm2/s).

CONCLUSIONS

Focal eosinophilic infiltration showed mixed hypointensity, irregular margins, and nonspherical shapes with excellent lesion-to-liver contrast in the hepatobiliary phase of the gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. Diffusion-weighted imaging and ADCs may not be helpful for characterizing these benign hepatic lesions.

MR findings of focal eosinophilic liver disease using gadoxetic acid

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to describe magnetic resonance (MR) findings of focal eosinophilic liver disease using gadoxetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Nineteen patients (M:F=14:5; age range, 26-66 years; mean age, 50 years) with 35 focal eosinophilic liver lesions were included after reviewing the medical records of 482 patients who underwent Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging (MRI) on a 3.0-T unit between April 2008 and June 2009. The diagnosis of focal eosinophilic liver disease was established by means of percutaneous liver biopsy or surgery and consistent clinical findings. Two radiologists retrospectively reviewed MR images with consensus. Margin, shape and distribution of the lesions were analyzed. We also evaluated signal intensity of focal hepatic lesions on T(1)- and T(2)-weighted images and patterns of enhancement in dynamic contrast study.

RESULTS

The mean diameter of the lesions was 1.7 cm (range, 0.7-6.1 cm). Most of the focal eosinophilic liver lesions [n=31/35 (88.6%)] had poorly defined margins. They were usually isointense or slightly hypointense [n=34/35 (97.2%)] on T(1)-weighted images and hyperintense [n=32/35 (91.4%)] on T(2)-weighted images. Dynamic study showed enhancement (rim or homogeneous) on the arterial phase [n=21/35 (60%)] and hypointensity on the late venous phase [n=31/35 (88.6%)]. All the lesions were hypointense on the hepatobiliary phase images.

CONCLUSION

Focal eosinophilic liver lesions tend to be hyperintense on the arterial phase and hypointense on the late venous phase during dynamic study of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI. Although these findings mimic other focal hepatic lesions, poorly defined margins of the lesions and peripheral eosinophilia might help distinguish focal eosinophilic liver disease from other hepatic lesions.

Focal eosinophilic necrosis on superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced MRI

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of our study was to evaluate the usefulness of superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO)-enhanced MRI for distinguishing focal eosinophilic necrosis (FEN) from hepatic metastasis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-one cases of FEN in 41 patients and 40 hepatic metastases in 40 patients were analyzed on unenhanced and SPIO-enhanced T2-weighted MRI retrospectively. Depending on the extent of the remaining hyperintense area on SPIO-enhanced T2-weighted images compared with the unenhanced images, the lesions were classified into four categories--category 1, less than 25%; category 2, 25-49%; category 3, 50-75%; and category 4, more than 75%--by two independent readers. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was measured using the same region of interest on unenhanced and SPIO-enhanced T2-weighted images. In three pathologic specimens of FEN, the number of Kupffer cells was compared with that of background hepatic parenchyma.

RESULTS

All metastases were classified as category 4, whereas FEN showed various distributions overall (category 1, 45.2%; category 2, 24.6%; category 3, 13.4%; category 4, 17.1%). FEN showed a decrease in CNR (from 7.9 +/- 5.8 to 6.1 +/- 5.6, p < 0.05), and metastases showed an increase in CNR (from 33.7 +/- 27.0 to 55.0 +/- 44.3, p < 0.05) after SPIO administration. In biopsy specimens, FEN had many more Kupffer cells (174.7 +/- 120.3 cells/high-power field [hpf]) than background hepatic parenchyma (23.7 +/- 9.8 cells/hpf). When using signal loss categories 1, 2, or 3 or CNR decrease, the accuracy of SPIO enhancement was 88.3%.

CONCLUSION

Unlike hepatic metastases, most of the cases of FEN showed a reduction in the extent of hyperintense area or a decrease in CNR after SPIO administration on the T2-weighted images. Therefore, SPIO-enhanced T2-weighted MRI can help to differentially diagnose FEN from metastases.