Usefulness of Modified CEUS LI-RADS for the Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Sonazoid

Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound With Sonazoid for Assessment of Focal Liver Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This meta-analysis examined the diagnostic accuracy of Sonazoid-enhanced ultrasonography (SZ-CEUS) in discriminating malignant from benign focal liver lesions (FLLs) and HCC from non-HCC FLLs. Finding relevant studies required a rigorous PubMed, EMBASE, and other database search. To distinguish malignant from benign FLLs, SZ-CEUS had a pooled sensitivity of 94% (95% CI: 0.91-0.95) and specificity of 84% (95%: 0.78-0.89). HCC distinction had 83% sensitivity and 96% specificity (95% CI: 0.80-0.85 and 0.95-0.97). SZ-CEUS accurately distinguishes malignant from benign FLLs and HCC from non-HCC lesions, especially smaller HCC lesions.

Contrast-Enhanced Sonography of the Liver: How to Avoid Artifacts

Contrast-enhanced sonography (CEUS) is a very important diagnostic imaging tool in clinical settings. However, it is associated with possible artifacts, such as B-mode US-related artifacts. Sufficient knowledge of US physics and these artifacts is indispensable to avoid the misinterpretation of CEUS images. This review aims to explain the basic physics of CEUS and the associated artifacts and to provide some examples to avoid them. This review includes problems related to the frame rate, scanning modes, and various artifacts encountered in daily CEUS examinations. Artifacts in CEUS can be divided into two groups: (1) B-mode US-related artifacts, which form the background of the CEUS image, and (2) artifacts that are specifically related to the CEUS method. The former includes refraction, reflection, reverberation (multiple reflections), attenuation, mirror image, and range-ambiguity artifacts. In the former case, the knowledge of B-mode US is sufficient to read the displayed artifactual image. Thus, in this group, the most useful artifact avoidance strategy is to use the reference B-mode image, which allows for a simultaneous comparison between the CEUS and B-mode images. In the latter case, CEUS-specific artifacts include microbubble destruction artifacts, prolonged heterogeneous accumulation artifacts, and CEUS-related posterior echo enhancement; these require an understanding of the mechanism of their appearance in CEUS images for correct image interpretation. Thus, in this group, the most useful artifact avoidance strategy is to confirm the phenomenon's instability by changing the examination conditions, including the frequency, depth, and other parameters.

The American College of Radiology contrast-enhanced ultrasound Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System and its modified version in diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma via Sonazoid: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The American College of Radiology (ACR) developed the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) for pure blood contrast agents, but Sonazoid was not included. Modifications to LI-RADS have been proposed for Sonazoid. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to identify and compare the diagnostic efficacy of the two LI-RADS algorithms of Sonazoid.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from databases inception to August 31, 2023, to find original studies on the ACR LI-RADS and/or modified LI-RADS algorithm with Sonazoid used as the contrast agent in patients with high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A bivariate random-effects model was used. Data pooling, meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis were performed for meta-analysis. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool was used to assess the methodological quality, and the Deeks funnel plot asymmetry test was used to evaluate the publication bias.

RESULTS

A meta-analysis of 10 studies with 1,611 observations was conducted. The pooled data for ACR LI-RADS category 5 (LR-5) and modified LR-5 were respectively as follows: pooled sensitivity, 0.70 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64-0.75] and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.76-0.86) (P<0.05); pooled specificity, 0.90 (95% CI: 0.82-0.94) and 0.87 (95% CI: 0.81-0.91) (P>0.05); and pooled area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.84 and 0.91. The diagnostic performance of LI-RADS category M (LR-M) of the two algorithms was comparable. Study heterogeneity was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicated that modified LR-5 algorithm demonstrated improved diagnostic sensitivity compared with the ACR LR-5 algorithm of Sonazoid, with differences observed between the different versions. Further research is needed to validate and explore the optimal diagnostic criteria for HCC using Sonazoid. Before the database search was conducted, this study was registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; CRD42023455220).

Assessment of arterial-phase hyperenhancement and late-phase washout of hepatocellular carcinoma-a meta-analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with SonoVue® and Sonazoid®

OBJECTIVES

The recognition of arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) and washout during the late phase is key for correct diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). This meta-analysis was conducted to compare SonoVue®-enhanced and Sonazoid®-enhanced ultrasound in the assessment of HCC enhancement and diagnosis.

METHODS

Studies were included in the analysis if they reported data for HCC enhancement in the arterial phase and late phase for SonoVue® or in the arterial phase and Kupffer phase (KP) for Sonazoid®. Forty-two studies (7502 patients) with use of SonoVue® and 30 studies (2391 patients) with use of Sonazoid® were identified. In a pooled analysis, the comparison between SonoVue® and Sonazoid® CEUS was performed using chi-square test. An inverse variance weighted random-effect model was used to estimate proportion, sensitivity, and specificity along with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

In the meta-analysis, the proportion of HCC showing APHE with SonoVue®, 93% (95% CI 91-95%), was significantly higher than the proportion of HCC showing APHE with Sonazoid®, 77% (71-83%) (p < 0.0001); similarly, the proportion of HCC showing washout at late phase/KP was significantly higher with SonoVue®, 86% (83-89%), than with Sonazoid®, 76% (70-82%) (p < 0.0001). The sensitivity and specificity for the detection of APHE plus late-phase/KP washout detection in HCC were also higher with SonoVue® than with Sonazoid® (sensitivity 80% vs 52%; specificity 80% vs 73% in studies within unselected patient populations).

CONCLUSION

APHE and late washout in HCC are more frequently observed with SonoVue® than with Sonazoid®. This may affect the diagnostic performance of CEUS in the diagnosis of HCCs.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Meta-analysis data show the presence of key enhancement features for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma is different between ultrasound contrast agents, and arterial hyperenhancement and late washout are more frequently observed at contrast-enhanced ultrasound with SonoVue® than with Sonazoid®.

KEY POINTS

• Dynamic enhancement features are key for imaging-based diagnosis of HCC. • Arterial hyperenhancement and late washout are more often observed in HCCs using SonoVue®-enhanced US than with Sonazoid®. • The existing evidence for contrast-enhanced US may need to be considered being specific to the individual contrast agent.

Intra-individual comparison of Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasound and SonoVue contrast-enhanced ultrasound in diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma

PURPOSE

To assess whether the diagnostic performance of Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasound (SZUS) is non-inferior to that of SonoVue contrast-enhanced ultrasound (SVUS) in diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in individuals with high risk.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective study was conducted from October 2020 to May 2022 and included participants with a high risk of HCC who underwent SZUS and SVUS. All lesions were confirmed by clinical or pathological diagnosis. Each nodule was classified according to the Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2017 (CEUS LI-RADS v2017) for SVUS and SZUS and the modified CEUS LI-RADS (using Kupffer phase defect instead of late and mild washout) for SZUS. The diagnostic performance of both two modalities for all observations was compared. Analysis of the vascular phase and Kupffer phase imaging characteristics of CEUS was performed.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifteen focal liver lesions from 113 patients (94 HCCs, 12 non-HCC malignancies, and 9 benign lesions) were analysed. According to CEUS LI-RADS (v2017), SVUS and SZUS showed similar sensitivity (71.3% vs. 72.3%) and specificity (85.7% vs. 81.0%) in HCC diagnosis. However, the modified CEUS LI-RADS did not significantly improve the diagnostic efficacy of Sonazoid compared to CEUS LI-RADS v2017, having equivalent sensitivity (73.4% vs. 72.3%) and specificity (81.0% vs. 81.0%). The agreement between SVUS and SZUS for all observations was 0.610 (95% CI 0.475, 0.745), while for HCCs it was 0.452 (95% CI 0.257, 0.647).

CONCLUSION

Using LI-RADS v2017, SZUS and SVUS showed non-inferior efficacy in evaluating HCC lesions. In addition, adding Kupffer phase defects to SZUS does not notably improve its diagnostic efficacy.

The efficacy of modified contrast-enhanced ultrasound Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (CEUS LI-RADS) using Sonazoid in diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The contrast-enhanced ultrasound Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (CEUS LI-RADS) is an algorithm for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in high-risk populations. Previous studies have shown the algorithm to have high specificity and moderate sensitivity. Nevertheless, it is designated for utilization solely with blood pool contrast agents. Sonazoid, a contrast agent that combines blood pools and Kupffer cells properties, has recently gained approval for marketing in an increased number of countries. Enhanced sensitivity in diagnosing HCC may be achieved through the distinctive Kupffer phase (KP) exhibited by Sonazoid. Certain academics have suggested the modified CEUS LI-RADS using Sonazoid. The main criteria of mild and late (≥60 seconds) washout in CEUS LI-RADS LR-5 were replaced by KP (>10 minutes) defects as the primary criteria. The purpose of this research was to evaluate the effectiveness of the modified CEUS LI-RADS using Sonazoid in diagnosing HCC.

Methods

Original studies on Sonazoid and CEUS LI-RADS were searched in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases until 13 July 2023, with no restrictions on language. We enrolled studies that applied Sonazoid for CEUS in patients at high risk of HCC and modified CEUS LI-RADS for the diagnosis of intrahepatic nodules. Meta-analyses, evaluations, case studies, correspondences, remarks, and summaries of conferences were excluded. Additionally, studies that fell outside the scope of this study and contained data on the same patients were also excluded. We evaluated the quality of research by employing the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. A bivariate mixed effects model was utilized to conduct a meta-analysis, summarizing the sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of HCC. The investigation of potential factors contributing to study heterogeneity was conducted using meta-regression analysis.

Results

Out of the 103 studies screened, 6 studies (835 lesions) were included in the final results. Modified CEUS LR-5 exhibited a sensitivity of 0.77 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70-0.82; I2=71.98%; P=0.00] and a specificity of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.83-0.92; I2=0.00; P=0.47) for HCC diagnosis, with heterogeneity in sensitivity. The presence of heterogeneity in the study was found to have a significant association with factors such as the study design, the number of image reviewers, the proportion of cirrhosis, the proportion of other non-HCC malignancies (OM) cases, and the type of reference standard (P≤0.05).

Conclusions

The modified CEUS LI-RADS LR-5 categorization demonstrates a reasonable level of sensitivity 0.77, but an insufficient level of specificity 0.88 when diagnosing HCC. KP defects cannot be used as a primary feature in the diagnosis of HCC by CEUS LI-RADS, perhaps as an ancillary feature.

Compared with SonoVue® LR-5, Sonazoid® modified LR-5 has better diagnostic sensitivity for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) is a standardized system for reporting liver nodules in patients at risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and is only recommended for pure blood pool agents such as SonoVue®. A modified LI-RADS was proposed for Sonazoid®, a Kupffer cell-specific contrast agent. This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the diagnostic efficiency of the CEUS LI-RADS for SonoVue® and the modified LI-RADS for Sonazoid®.

METHODS

The PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched to retrieve studies on the diagnostic efficiency of the CEUS LI-RADS algorithms in diagnosing HCC using SonoVue® and/or Sonazoid® from January 2016 to June 2023. Histopathology or imaging follow-up served as the reference standards. Only articles published in English on retrospective or prospective studies with full reports were included in the meta-analysis. A bivariate random-effects model was used. Data pooling, meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis were performed for the meta-analysis. Deeks' funnel plot asymmetry test was used to evaluate publication bias, and the QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess the methodological quality of eligible studies.

RESULTS

In total, 26 studies comprising 8,495 patients with 9,244 lesions were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled data results for SonoVue® LI-RADS category 5 (LR-5) and Sonazoid® modified LR-5 were as follows: pooled sensitivity: 0.68 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64-0.73, I2=89.20%; P<0.01] and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.74-0.87, I2=85.39%; P<0.01) (P<0.05); pooled specificity: 0.93 (95% CI: 0.90-0.96, I2=86.52%; P<0.01) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.79-0.91, I2=59.91%; P=0.01) (P<0.05); pooled area under the curve (AUC): 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82-0.89) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.88-0.93) (P<0.05), respectively. The meta-regression analysis revealed that the study design, subject enrollment method, and reference standard contributed to the heterogeneity of SonoVue® LR-5, and the number of lesions was a source of heterogeneity for Sonazoid® modified LR-5. The diagnostic performance of the LI-RADS category M (LR-M) algorithms of SonoVue® and Sonazoid® was comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

The Sonazoid® modified LR-5 algorithm had a higher diagnostic sensitivity, lower specificity, and higher AUC than SonoVue® LR-5.

Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound With Perfluorobutane for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Diagnosis: Comparison of Imaging Phases and Diagnostic Criteria

BACKGROUND. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with perfluorobutane has used varying protocols and diagnostic criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article was to assess diagnostic performance for HCC of CEUS with perfluorobutane in high-risk patients using various criteria. METHODS. This retrospective post hoc study evaluating individual patient data from three earlier prospective studies from one hospital included 204 patients (136 men, 68 women; mean age, 63 ± 11 [SD] years) at high risk of HCC with 213 liver observations. Patients underwent CEUS using perfluorobutane from March 2019 to June 2022. Three radiologists (the examination's operator and two subsequent reviewers) independently interpreted examinations, assessing arterial, portal venous (arterial phase completion through 2 minutes), transitional (2-5 minutes after injection), and Kupffer (≥ 10 minutes after injection) phase findings. Six criteria for HCC were tested: 1, any arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) with Kupffer phase hypoenhancement; 2, nonrim APHE with Kupffer phase hypoenhancement; 3, nonrim APHE with portal venous washout; 4, nonrim APHE with portal venous washout and/or Kupffer phase hypoenhancement; 5, nonrim APHE with portal venous and/or transitional washout; 6, nonrim APHE with any of portal venous washout, transitional washout, or Kupffer phase hypoenhancement. Depending on the criteria, observations were instead deemed to be a non-HCC malignancy if showing rim APHE, early washout (at < 1 minute), or marked washout (at 2 minutes). Reference was pathology for malignant observations and pathology or imaging follow-up for benign observations. Diagnostic performance was assessed, pooling readers' data. RESULTS. Criterion 1 (no recognized features of non-HCC malignancy) had highest sensitivity (86.9%) but lowest specificity (43.2%) for HCC. Compared with nonrim APHE and portal venous washout (criterion 3), the addition of Kupffer phase hypoenhancement (criterion 4), transitional washout (criterion 5), or either feature (criterion 6) significantly increased sensitivity (34.4% vs 62.6-64.2%) and accuracy (61.8% vs 75.1-76.5%), but significantly decreased specificity (98.5% vs 91.9-94.1%). Criteria 2, 4, 5, and 6 (all incorporating transitional washout and/or Kupffer phase hypoenhancement) showed no significant differences in sensitivity (62.6-64.2%), specificity (91.9-94.1%), or accuracy (75.1-76.5%). CONCLUSION. Recognition of features of non-HCC malignancy improved specificity for HCC. Incorporation of the findings of transitional washout and/or Kupffer phase hypoenhancement improved sensitivity and accuracy, albeit lowered specificity, versus arterial and portal venous findings alone, without further performance variation among criteria incorporating those two findings. CLINICAL IMPACT. Kupffer phase acquisition may be optional for observations classified as HCC or non-HCC malignancy by arterial, portal venous, and transitional phases.

Comparison of the Feasibility and Diagnostic Performance of ACR CEUS LI-RADS and a Modified CEUS LI-RADS for HCC in Examinations Using Sonazoid

OBJECTIVES

The present study aimed to determine the feasibility of the American College of Radiology's (ACR) contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) (version 2017) in examinations using Sonazoid and compare its diagnostic performance with that of modified LI-RADS in patients at high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

This retrospective study's sample population consisted of 137 participants with a total of 140 nodules who underwent CEUS with Sonazoid and pathological confirmation via surgery or biopsy from January 2020 to February 2022. The lesions were evaluated and classified based on the reference standards (ie, ACR CEUS LI-RADS and modified LI-RADS). The overall diagnostic capabilities of the two systems were evaluated in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

The participants had a median age of 51 years and an interquartile range of 43-58 years. Regarding LR-5 as a predictor of HCC, the accuracy results of the ACR LI-RADS and modified LI-RADS algorithms were 72.9 and 71.4%, respectively (P = .50). The sensitivity of both systems was the same (69.7%; 95% CI: 60.7-77.8%). Regarding LR-M as a predictor of non-HCC malignancy, the diagnostic performance of the algorithms was the same, with accuracy and sensitivity results of 76.4 and 73.3%, respectively (95% CI: 44.9-92.2%).

CONCLUSION

The findings indicate that modified LI-RADS had a moderate level of diagnostic performance for HCC in examinations using Sonazoid, which was comparable to ACR LI-RADS.

Sonazoid-enhanced ultrasonography for noninvasive imaging diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: special emphasis on the 2022 KLCA-NCC guideline

Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) is a noninvasive imaging modality used to diagnose hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) based on specific imaging features, without the need for pathologic confirmation. Two types of ultrasound contrast agents are commercially available: pure intravascular agents (such as SonoVue) and Kupffer agents (such as Sonazoid). Major guidelines recognize CEUS as a reliable imaging method for HCC diagnosis, although they differ depending on the contrast agents used. The Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center guideline includes CEUS with either SonoVue or Sonazoid as a second-line diagnostic technique. However, Sonazoid-enhanced ultrasound is associated with several unresolved issues. This review provides a comparative overview of these contrast agents regarding pharmacokinetic features, examination protocols, diagnostic criteria for HCC, and potential applications in the HCC diagnostic algorithm.

Perfluorobutane-Enhanced Ultrasound for Characterization of Hepatocellular Carcinoma From Non-hepatocellular Malignancies or Benignancy: Comparison of Imaging Acquisition Methods

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the work described here was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of perfluorobutane (PFB)-enhanced ultrasound in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from non-HCC malignancies and other benign lesions using different acquisition methods.

METHODS

This prospective study included 69 patients with solid liver lesions larger than 1 cm who were scheduled for biopsy or radiofrequency ablation between September 2020 and March 2021. Lesion diagnosis was designated by three blinded radiologists after reviewing three different sets of acquired images selected according to the following presumed acquisition methods: (i) method A, acquisition up to 5 min after contrast injection; (ii) method B, acquisition up to 1 min after contrast injection with additional Kupffer phase; and (iii) method C, acquisition up to 5 min after contrast injection with additional Kupffer phase.

RESULTS

After excluding 7 technical failures, 62 patients with liver lesions (mean size: 24.2 ± 14.8 mm), which consisted of 7 benign lesions, 37 non-HCC malignancies and 18 HCCs. For the HCC diagnosis, method C had the highest sensitivity (75.9%), followed by method B (72.2%) and method A (68.5%), but failed to exhibit statistical significance (p = 0.12). There was no significant difference with respect to the pooled specificity between the three methods (p = 0.28). Diagnostic accuracy was the highest with method C (87.1%) but failed to exhibit statistical significance (p = 0.24).

CONCLUSION

Image acquisition up to 5 min after contrast injection with additional Kupffer phase could potentially result in high accuracy and sensitivity without loss of specificity in diagnosing HCC with PFB-enhanced ultrasound.

Diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma using Sonazoid: a comprehensive review

Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) is a promising technique for the detection and diagnosis of focal liver lesions, particularly hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Recently, a collaborative effort between the Korean Society of Radiology and Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology resulted in the publication of guidelines for diagnosing HCC using Sonazoid CEUS. These guidelines propose specific criteria for identifying HCC based on the imaging characteristics observed during Sonazoid CEUS. The suggested diagnostic criteria include nonrim arterial phase hyperenhancement, and the presence of late and mild washout, or Kupffer phase washout under the premise that the early or marked washout should not occur during the portal venous phase. These criteria aim to improve the accuracy of HCC diagnosis using Sonazoid CEUS. This review offers a comprehensive overview of Sonazoid CEUS in the context of HCC diagnosis. It covers the fundamental principles of Sonazoid CEUS and its clinical applications, and introduces the recently published guidelines. By providing a summary of this emerging technique, this review contributes to a better understanding of the potential role of Sonazoid CEUS for diagnosing HCC.

Multimodality imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma are the two most common primary malignant tumors of the liver. The similarities and variations in imaging characteristics that may aid in distinguishing between these two primary tumors will be discussed and outlined in this review. Knowledge of imaging techniques that are currently available would assist in the differentiation between these primary malignancies.

Contrast-enhanced US with Sulfur Hexafluoride and Perfluorobutane: LI-RADS for Diagnosing Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Background Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) was designed for contrast-enhanced US (CEUS) with pure blood pool agents to diagnose hepatocellularfcarcinoma (HCC), such as sulfur hexafluoride (SHF), but Kupffer-cell agents, such as perfluorobutane (PFB), allow additional lesion characterization in the Kupffer phase yet remain unaddressed. Purpose To compare the diagnostic performance of three algorithms for HCC diagnosis: two algorithms based on CEUS LI-RADS version 2017 for both SHF and PFB and a modified algorithm incorporating Kupffer-phase findings for PFB. Materials and Methods This multicenter prospective study enrolled high-risk patients for HCC from June 2021 to December 2021. Each participant underwent same-day SHF-enhanced US followed by PFB-enhanced US. Each liver observation was assigned three LI-RADS categories according to each algorithm: LI-RADS SHF, LI-RADS PFB, and modified PFB. For modified PFB, observations at least 10 mm with nonrim arterial phase hyperenhancement were upgraded LR-4 to LR-5 if there was no washout with a Kupffer defect and were reassigned LR-M to LR-5 if there was early washout with mild Kupffer defect. The reference standard was pathologic confirmation or composite (typical CT or MRI features, or 1-year size stability and/or reduction). Diagnostic metrics of LR-5 for HCC using the three algorithms were calculated and compared using the McNemar test. Results Overall, 375 patients (mean age, 56 years ± 11 [SD]; 318 male patients, 57 female patients) with 424 observations (345 HCCs, 40 non-HCC malignancies, 39 benign lesions) were enrolled. PFB and SHF both using LI-RADS showed no significant difference in sensitivity (60% vs 58%; P = .41) and specificity (96% vs 95%; P > .99). The modified algorithm with PFB had increased sensitivity (80% vs 58%; P < .001) and a nonsignificant decrease in specificity (92% vs 95%; P = .73) compared with LI-RADS SHF. Conclusion Based on CEUS LI-RADS version 2017, both SHF and PFB achieved high specificity and relatively low sensitivity for HCC diagnosis. When incorporating Kupffer-phase findings, PFB had higher sensitivity without loss of specificity. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry no. ChiCTR2100047035 © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Kim in this issue.

Diagnosing Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Sonazoid Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography: 2023 Guidelines From the Korean Society of Radiology and the Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology

Sonazoid, a second-generation ultrasound contrast agent, was introduced for the diagnosis of hepatic nodules. To clarify the issues with Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the Korean Society of Radiology and Korean Society of Abdominal Radiology collaborated on the guidelines. The guidelines are de novo, evidence-based, and selected using an electronic voting system for consensus. These include imaging protocols, diagnostic criteria for HCC, diagnostic value for lesions that are inconclusive on other imaging results, differentiation from non-HCC malignancies, surveillance of HCC, and treatment response after locoregional and systemic treatment for HCC.

Intraindividual Comparison of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Using Perfluorobutane With Modified Criteria Versus CT/MRI LI-RADS Version 2018 for Diagnosing HCC in High-Risk Patients

BACKGROUND. Previously proposed modifications to LI-RADS criteria for contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) performed using perfluorobutane contrast agent yielded increased sensitivity for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) without a significant decrease in specificity. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to compare the diagnostic performance of CEUS with perfluorobutane using modified LI-RADS criteria versus contrast-enhanced CT or MRI using LI-RADS version 2018 (v2018) for characterizing lesions as HCC in high-risk patients. METHODS. This retrospective study included 171 patients (140 men, 31 women; mean age, 54 ± 12 [SD] years) at high-risk for HCC with a pathologically confirmed liver observation evaluated by both CEUS using perfluorobutane and contrast-enhanced CT or MRI between March 2020 and May 2021. A matching algorithm was used to select two patients with HCC for each patient with a non-HCC lesion. Two readers evaluated observations using previously proposed modifications to CEUS LI-RADS version 2017 that classify certain observations as LR-5 rather than as LR-4 or LR-M on the basis of the presence of Kupffer phase defect after perfluorobutane administration; two different readers evaluated observations using CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018. Each reader pair reached consensus. Diagnostic performance was evaluated. RESULTS. A total of 114 patients had HCC, 43 had a non-HCC malignancy, and 14 had a benign lesion. Modified CEUS criteria using perfluorobutane and CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 showed no significant difference (p > .05) in sensitivity (92.1% vs 89.5%), specificity (87.7% vs 84.2%), or accuracy (90.6% vs 87.7%) of LR-5 for diagnosis of HCC. Of six observations assessed as LR-4 only by CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018, modified CEUS criteria using perfluorobutane assessed one as LR-3 (benign lesion) and five as LR-5 (all HCC). Of seven observations assessed as LR-M only by CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018, modified CEUS criteria using perfluorobutane assessed one as LR-3 (non-HCC malignancy) and six as LR-5 (all HCC). Eight of 12 observations assessed as LR-5 only by CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 and 11 of 13 observations assessed as LR-5 only by modified CEUS criteria using perfluorobutane were HCC. CONCLUSION. The diagnostic performance of LR-5 for HCC diagnosis was not significantly different between modified CEUS criteria using perfluorobutane and CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018. CLINICAL IMPACT. The findings support the application of modified CEUS criteria using perfluorobutane for diagnosing HCC in high-risk patients.

Perfluorobutane-enhanced ultrasonography with a Kupffer phase: improved diagnostic sensitivity for hepatocellular carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of perfluorobutane contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and to explore how accuracy can be improved compared to conventional diagnostic criteria in at-risk patients.

METHODS

A total of 123 hepatic nodules (≥ 1 cm) from 123 at-risk patients who underwent perfluorobutane CEUS between 2013 and 2020 at three institutions were retrospectively analyzed. Ninety-three percent of subjects had pathological results, except benign lesions stable in follow-up images. We evaluated presence of arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE), washout time and degree, and Kupffer phase (KP) defects. KP defects are defined as hypoenhancing lesions relative to the liver in KP. HCC was diagnosed in two ways: (1) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) criteria defined as APHE and late (≥ 60 s)/mild washout, and (2) APHE and Kupffer (AK) criteria defined as APHE and KP defect. We explored grayscale features that cause misdiagnosis of HCC and reflected in the adjustment. Diagnostic performance was compared using McNemar's test.

RESULTS

There were 77 HCCs, 15 non-HCC malignancies, and 31 benign lesions. An ill-defined margin without hypoechoic halo on grayscale applied as a finding that did not suggest HCC. Regarding diagnosis of HCC, sensitivity of AK criteria (83.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 72.9-90.7%) was higher than that of LI-RADS criteria (75.3%; 95% CI: 64.2-84.4%; p = 0.041). Specificity was 91.3% (95% CI: 79.2-97.6%) in both groups.

CONCLUSION

On perfluorobutane CEUS, diagnostic criteria for HCC using KP defect with adjustment by grayscale findings had higher diagnostic performance than conventional criteria without losing specificity.

KEY POINTS

• Applying Kupffer phase defect instead of late/mild washout and adjusting with grayscale findings can improve the diagnostic performance of perfluorobutane-enhanced US for HCC. • Adjustment with ill-defined margins without a hypoechoic halo for features unlikely to be HCC decreases false positives for HCC diagnosis using the perfluorobutane-enhanced US. • After adjustment with grayscale findings, the sensitivity and accuracy of the APHE and Kupffer criteria were higher than those of the LI-RADS criteria; specificity was 91.3% for both.

Utility of Sonazoid-Enhanced Ultrasound for the Macroscopic Classification of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-analysis

We assessed the diagnostic value of Sonazoid-enhanced ultrasound (SEUS) in determining the macroscopic classification of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) because of its strong relevance to the poor prognosis of the non-simple nodular (non-SN) type. The PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies investigating patients who underwent surgery for HCC after undergoing SEUS pre-operatively. Five studies involving a total of 334 patients met the inclusion criteria. The summary sensitivity and specificity were 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63-0.83) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.82-0.97), respectively. The positive and negative likelihood ratios of SEUS for determining the macroscopic classification of HCC in Kupffer phase were 9.21 (95% CI: 4.02-21.13) and 0.28 (95% CI: 0.19-0.41), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio of SEUS for determining the macroscopic classification of HCC was 34.2 (95% CI: 11.64-100.51), and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.84-0.90). Subgroup analysis suggested that small HCCs (≤30 mm) and studies including fewer than 70 patients may be associated with a higher diagnostic odds ratio than the corresponding subsets. SEUS had moderate diagnostic value for determining the macroscopic classification of HCC in the Kupffer phase.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in adults with chronic liver disease

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma occurs mostly in people with chronic liver disease. Worldwide, it ranks sixth in terms of incidence of cancer, and fourth in terms of cancer-related deaths. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is used as an add-on test to confirm the presence of focal liver lesions suspected as hepatocellular carcinoma after prior diagnostic tests such as abdominal ultrasound or measurement of alpha-foetoprotein, or both. According to guidelines, a single contrast-enhanced imaging investigation, with either computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), may show the typical hepatocellular carcinoma hallmarks in people with cirrhosis, which will be sufficient to diagnose hepatocellular carcinoma. However, a significant number of hepatocellular carcinomas show atypical imaging features, and therefore, are missed at imaging. Dynamic CEUS images are obtained similarly to CT and MRI images. CEUS differentiates between arterial and portal venous phases, in which sonographic hepatocellular carcinoma hallmarks, such as arterial hyperenhancement and subsequent washout appearance, are investigated. The advantages of CEUS over CT and MRI include real-time imaging, use of contrast agents that do not contain iodine and are not nephrotoxic, and quick image acquisition. Despite the advantages, the use of CEUS in the diagnostic algorithm for HCC remains controversial, with disagreement on relevant guidelines. There is no clear evidence of the benefit of surveillance programmes in terms of overall survival as the conflicting results can be a consequence of an inaccurate detection, ineffective treatment, or both. Therefore, assessing the diagnostic accuracy of CEUS may clarify whether the absence of benefit could be related to underdiagnosis. Furthermore, an assessment of the accuracy of CEUS for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma is needed for either diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma or ruling it out in people with chronic liver disease who are not included in surveillance programmes.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma of any size and at any stage in adults with chronic liver disease, in a surveillance programme or in a clinical setting. 2. To assess the diagnostic accuracy of CEUS for the diagnosis of resectable hepatocellular carcinoma in people with chronic liver disease and identify potential sources of heterogeneity in the results.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The last date of search was 5 November 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of CEUS for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in adults with chronic liver disease, with cross-sectional designs, using one of the acceptable reference standards, such as pathology of the explanted liver, and histology of resected or biopsied focal liver lesion with at least a six-month follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods to screen studies, extract data, and assess the risk of bias and applicability concerns, using the QUADAS-2 checklist. We used the bivariate model and provided estimates of summary sensitivity and specificity. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We presented uncertainty-of-the-accuracy estimates using 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 studies with 6546 participants. Studies were published between 2001 and 2021. We judged all 23 studies at high-risk of bias in at least one domain, and 13/23 studies at high concern for applicability. Most studies used different reference standards to exclude the presence of the target condition. The time interval between the index test and the reference standard was rarely defined. We also had major concerns on their applicability due to the characteristics of the participants. - CEUS for hepatocellular carcinoma of any size and stage: sensitivity 77.8% (95% CI 69.4% to 84.4%) and specificity 93.8% (95% CI 89.1% to 96.6%) (23 studies, 6546 participants; very low-certainty evidence). - CEUS for resectable hepatocellular carcinoma: sensitivity 77.5% (95% CI 62.9% to 87.6%) and specificity 92.7% (95% CI 86.8% to 96.1%) (13 studies, 1257 participants; low-certainty evidence). The observed heterogeneity in the results remains unexplained. The sensitivity analyses, including only studies with clearly prespecified positivity criteria and only studies in which the reference standard results were interpreted with no knowledge of the results about the index test, showed no differences in the results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that by using CEUS, as an add-on test following abdominal ultrasound, to diagnose hepatocellular carcinoma of any size and stage, 22% of people with hepatocellular carcinoma would be missed, and 6% of people without hepatocellular carcinoma would unnecessarily undergo further testing or inappropriate treatment. As to resectable hepatocellular carcinoma, we found that 23% of people with resectable hepatocellular carcinoma would incorrectly be unresected, while 8% of people without hepatocellular carcinoma would undergo further inappropriate testing or treatment. The uncertainty resulting from the high risk of bias of the included studies, heterogeneity, and imprecision of the results and concerns on their applicability limit our ability to draw confident conclusions.

Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Using Perfluorobutane: Impact of Proposed Modified LI-RADS Criteria on Hepatocellular Carcinoma Detection

BACKGROUND. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) LI-RADS version 2017 (v2017) applies only to CEUS examinations performed using pure blood pool agents, noting that future versions will address combined blood pool and Kupffer cell agents such as perfluorobutane. Such agents may improve hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) detection by visualization of a defect in the Kupffer phase (obtained ≥ 10 minutes after injection). OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to compare the diagnostic performance of the LR-5 category for HCC detection in at-risk patients between CEUS LI-RADS v2017 and proposed modified criteria for CEUS examinations performed using perfluorobutane. METHODS. This retrospective study included 293 patients at risk for HCC (259 men, 34 women; mean age, 55 ± 12 [SD] years) who underwent CEUS using perfluorobutane from March 1, 2020, to October 30, 2020, showing a total of 304 observations (274 HCC, 14 non-HCC malignancy, and 16 benign lesions). Two readers independently assessed examinations and assigned categories using both CEUS LI-RADS v2017 and the proposed modified criteria. In the modified criteria, observations 10 mm or greater with not rim arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE), no washout, and a Kupffer defect were upgraded from LR-4 to LR-5, and observations 10 mm or greater with not rim APHE, early washout, and a mild Kupffer defect were reassigned from LR-M to LR-5. Interreader agreement was assessed, and consensus interpretations were reached. Diagnostic performance was evaluated. RESULTS. Interreader agreement for LI-RADS category assignments, expressed using kappa coefficients, was 0.839 for CEUS LI-RADS v2017 and 0.854 for the modified criteria. Modified criteria upgraded 35 observations from LR-4 to LR-5 on the basis of a Kupffer defect, of which 34 were HCC and one was benign. Modified criteria reassigned 22 observations from LR-M to LR-5 on the basis of a mild Kupffer defect, of which all were HCC. LR-5 using modified criteria, compared with CEUS LI-RADS v2017, had significantly increased sensitivity (89% vs 69%, p < .001), a nonsignificant decrease in specificity (83% vs 87%, p > .99), and significantly increased accuracy (89% vs 71%, p < .001) for HCC. CONCLUSION. When using perfluorobutane for CEUS in at-risk patients, modified criteria incorporating Kupffer defects significantly improve sensitivity without significant loss of specificity in HCC detection. CLINICAL IMPACT. Future CEUS LI-RADS updates seeking to address the use of combined blood pool and Kupffer cell agents should consider adoption of the explored criteria.

Comparison of modified CEUS LI-RADS with sonazoid and CT/MRI LI-RADS for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma

AIM

To compare the diagnostic performance based on the modified CEUS Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS), which includes Kupffer-phase findings as a major imaging feature, with that of CT and MRI (CT/MRI) LI-RADS for liver nodules in patients at high risk of HCC.

METHODS

A total of 120 patients with 120 nodules were included in this retrospective study. The median size of the lesions was 20.0 mm (interquartile range, 14.0-30.8 mm). Of these lesions, 90.0% (108 of 120) were confirmed as HCCs, 6.7% (8 of 120) were intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas, 1.7% (2 of 120) were metastases, and 1.7% (2 of 120) were dysplastic nodules. All nodules were diagnosed histopathologically. Each nodule was categorized according to the modified CEUS LI-RADS and CT/MRI LI-RADS version 2018. The diagnostic performance and inter-modality agreement of each criterion was compared.

RESULTS

The inter-modality agreement for the modified CEUS LI-RADS and CT/MRI LI-RADS was slight agreement (kappa = 0.139, p = 0.015). The diagnostic accuracies of HCCs for the modified CEUS LR-5 and CT/MRI LR-5 were 70.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 61.0%, 78.0%) versus 70.8% (95% CI: 61.8%, 78.8%) (p = 0.876), respectively. The diagnostic accuracies of non-HCC malignancies for the modified CEUS LR-M and CT/MRI LR-M were 84.2% (95% CI: 76.4%, 90.2%) versus 96.7% (95% CI: 91.7%, 99.1%) (p = 0.002), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic performance for HCCs on the modified CEUS LR-5 and CT/MRI LR-5 are comparable. In contrast, CT/MRI LR-M has better diagnostic performance for non-HCC malignancy than that of the modified CEUS LR-M.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound manifestations of synchronous combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma: A case report

BACKGROUND

Synchronous combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (CHC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is very rare, with few literature reports and poor clinical outcomes associated with the disorder. Surgical resection is the main treatment, which makes the preoperative diagnosis very important. However, due to imaging manifestations overlapping with HCC, diagnosis of this type of synchronous cancer is challenging and it tends to be misdiagnosed as multiple HCC. Herein, we report the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) manifestations of a case of synchronous CHC and HCC, aiming at adding to the understanding of this disease. CEUS displayed exquisite vascularity and tissue perfusion in real time with good spatial and temporal resolution and more accurately reflect tumor washin and washout times than contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) in this case.

CASE SUMMARY

The patient was a 69-year-old female with a 20-year history of chronic hepatitis B. Due to months of epigastric pain and anorexia, she reffered to our hospital for treatment. Five days before hospitalization, abdominal magnetic resonance imaging performed at another hospital detected a space-occupying lesion in the liver. After her hospitalization, laboratory tests showed elevated alpha-fetoprotein and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 level. Two suspicious liver lesions located in S4 and S6, respectively, were identified in a cirrhotic background by abdominal contrast-enhanced CT (CECT). Furthermore, the lesion in S4 and S6 were detected by CEUS and assigned to CEUS LI-RADS 5 and M categories, respectively. The patient underwent tumor radical resections. Post-operative pathology confirmed the S4 and S6 lesions to be HCC and CHC, respectively. A newly-found suspicious liver nodule with potential malignancy was detected in liver S1 by both CEUS and CECT 7 mo after operation.

CONCLUSION

The CEUS characteristics of CHC and HCC are different. CEUS features in combination with clinical information could help in effective diagnosis, clinical decision-making and better prognosis.

Noninvasive Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma on Sonazoid-Enhanced US: Value of the Kupffer Phase

The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of Contrast-Enhanced US Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (CEUS LI-RADS) version 2017, which includes portal- and late-phase washout as a major imaging feature, with that of modified CEUS LI-RADS, which includes Kupffer-phase findings as a major imaging feature. Participants at risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with treatment-naïve hepatic lesions (≥1 cm) were recruited and underwent Sonazoid-enhanced US. Arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE), washout time, and echogenicity in the Kupffer phase were evaluated using both criteria. The diagnostic performance of both criteria was analyzed using the McNemar test. The evaluation was performed on 102 participants with 102 lesions (HCCs (n = 52), non-HCC malignancies (n = 36), and benign (n = 14)). Among 52 HCCs, non-rim APHE was observed in 92.3% (48 of 52). By 5 min, 73.1% (38 of 52) of HCCs showed mild washout, while by 10 min or in the Kupffer phase, 90.4% (47 of 52) of HCCs showed hypoenhancement. The sensitivity (67.3%; 35 of 52; 95% CI: 52.9%, 79.7%) of modified CEUS LI-RADS criteria was higher than that of CEUS LI-RADS criteria (51.9%; 27 of 52; 95% CI: 37.6%, 66.0%) (p = 0.0047). In conclusion, non-rim APHE with hypoenhancement in the Kupffer phase on Sonazoid-enhanced US is a feasible criterion for diagnosing HCC.

Imaging Diagnosis of HCC: Future directions with special emphasis on hepatobiliary MRI and contrast-enhanced ultrasound

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a unique cancer entity that can be noninvasively diagnosed using imaging modalities without pathologic confirmation. In 2018, several major guidelines for HCC were updated to include hepatobiliary contrast agent magnetic resonance imaging (HBA-MRI) and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) as major imaging modalities for HCC diagnosis. HBA-MRI enables the achievement of high sensitivity in HCC detection using the hepatobiliary phase (HBP). CEUS is another imaging modality with real-time imaging capability, and it is reported to be useful as a second-line modality to increase sensitivity without losing specificity for HCC diagnosis. However, until now, there is an unsolved discrepancy among guidelines on whether to accept “HBP hypointensity” as a definite diagnostic criterion for HCC or include CEUS in the diagnostic algorithm for HCC diagnosis. Furthermore, there is variability in terminology and inconsistencies in the definition of imaging findings among guidelines; therefore, there is an unmet need for the development of a standardized lexicon. In this article, we review the performance and limitations of HBA-MRI and CEUS after guideline updates in 2018 and briefly introduce some future aspects of imaging-based HCC diagnosis.

Role of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography in Hepatocellular Carcinoma by Using LI-RADS and Ancillary Features: A Single Tertiary Centre Experience

Clinical utility of ancillary features (AFs) in contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS®) is yet to be established. In this study, we assessed the diagnostic yield of CEUS LI-RADS and AFs in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We retrospectively included patients with risk factors for HCC and newly diagnosed focal liver lesions (FLL). All lesions have been categorized according to the CEUS LI-RADS v2017 by an experienced sonographer blinded to clinical data and to the final diagnosis. From a total of 143 patients with 191 FLL, AFs favoring HCC were observed in 19.8% cases as hypoechoic rim and in 16.7% cases as nodule-in nodule architecture. From the total of 141 HCC cases, 83.6% were correctly classified: 57.4%- LR-5 and 26.2%- LR-4. In 9.21% cases, CEUS indicated LR-M; 2.12% cases- LR-3. The LR-5 category was 96.2% predictive (PPV) of HCC. LR-5 had 60.4% sensitivity and 93.6% specificity. PPV for primitive malignancy (LR-4 + LR-5) was 95.7%, with 88% sensitivity, 89.3% specificity and 88.4% accuracy for HCC. LR-4 category had 94.8% PPV and 26.2% sensitivity. CEUS LR4 + LR5 had 81,8% sensitivity for HCCs over 2 cm and 78.57% sensitivity for smaller HCCs. CEUS LR-5 remains an excellent diagnostic tool for HCC, despite the size of the lesion. The use of AFs might improve the overarching goal of LR-5 + LR-4 diagnosis of high specificity for HCC and exclusion of non-HCC malignancy.

Perfluorobutane contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for the diagnosis of HCC: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Perfluorobutane ultrasound contrast agent as a new type of contrast agent has a good performance in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aim to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of Perfluorobutane contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (P-CEUS) in the diagnosis of HCC with a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane, Clinical Key, Wan Fang, CBM and CNKI databases were systematically searched and checked for studies using P-CEUS in HCC, from 2007 to 2020. Data necessary to construct 2 × 2 contingency tables were extracted from included studies. The QUADAS tool was utilized to assess the methodologic quality of the studies. Meta-analysis included data pooling, subgroup analyses, meta-regression and investigation of publication bias was comprehensively performed.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included in this meta-analysis and the overall diagnostic accuracy in characterization of HCC was as follows: pooled sensitivity, 0.90 (95% confidence interval: 0.82-0.95); pooled specificity, 0.97 (0.93-0.98); pooled positive likelihood ratio, 27.2 (14.1 to - 52.3); and pooled negative likelihood ratio, 0.10 (0.06-0.18). The area under the comprehensive receiving operation characteristic curve was 0.98 (0.97-0.99).

CONCLUSION

The sensitivity and specificity of P-CEUS are more valuable than other imaging techniques (such as computer tomography or magnetic resonance imaging). However, due to the large differences in the data samples collected in this study, statistical heterogeneity results. P-CEUS can significantly improve the diagnostic efficiency of previous contrast-enhanced ultrasound for HCC. PROSPERO registration number: PROSPERO (CRD42020200040).

MR versus CEUS LI-RADS for Distinguishing Hepatocellular Carcinoma from other Hepatic Malignancies in High-Risk Patients

Distinguishing between other hepatic malignancies (OMs) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is vital to allow clinicians to determine optimal treatment and assess prognosis in patients at high risk for HCC. This study evaluated the performance of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) versus contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) for differentiating HCC from OMs in patients at high risk for HCC. This retrospective study consecutively enrolled 106 high-risk patients with HCC and 52 high-risk patients with OMs. Patients underwent both MRI and CEUS, with histologic diagnosis as a reference standard. The diagnostic performance of MR versus CEUS LI-RADS was calculated and compared. The performance of the modified CEUS LI-RADS criteria was also evaluated and compared. Our research found that MRI features significantly differed between patients with OMs and those with HCC (p < 0.05), with sensitivities of 34.6%-69.2% and specificities of 83.0%-95.3% for diagnosing OMs and an LI-RADS M (LR-M): definite or probable malignancy, not specific for hepatocellular carcinoma sensitivity of 90.4% and specificity of 83.0% for diagnosing OM. CEUS features also significantly differed between patients with OM and HCC (p < 0.05), with sensitivities of 11.5%-96.2% and specificities of 23.6%-100% for diagnosing OMs, and an LR-M sensitivity of 98.1% and specificity of 84.0% for diagnosing OMs. Accuracies of category LR-M did not significantly differ between MR and CEUS LI-RADS (85.4% vs. 88.6%, p = 0.724). After reclassification of category LR-M nodules to category LR-5 if they exhibited clear intratumoral non-enhanced area boundaries and no punched-out appearance before 5 min, accuracy increased from 88.6% to 96.8% for CEUS LR-M and from 84.8% to 91.1% for CEUS LR-5. LR-M accuracies were significantly higher for the modified version of the CEUS LI-RADS than for MR LI-RADS (96.8% vs. 85.4%, respectively, p = 0.04). CEUS LI-RADS and MR LI-RADS can effectively be used to distinguish HCC from OMs. In patients at high risk of HCC, performance may be further improved by using a modified CEUS LI-RADS classification system in which category LR-M lesions are considered LR-5 if they have clear intratumoral non-enhanced area boundaries and do not have a punched-out appearance.