A Modified Targetoid Feature Emphasizing Thin-Rim APHE to Improve the Diagnostic Performance of LI-RADS for Malignant Hepatic Tumors.

Objective: To identify imaging features that help distinguish between HCCs and non-HCC malignancies assigned to LI-RADS M (LR-M) and evaluate the diagnostic performance of a LI-RADS with targetoid criteria using thin-rim arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE). Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 381 patients (387 observations) at high-risk for HCC who underwent enhanced-MRI before surgery. Three radiologists reviewed images for LI-RADS categorization of hepatic observations. Univariate and multivariate analysis was conducted to determine reliable features to differentiate between HCC and non-HCC malignancies among the LR-M lesions. The thin-rim (<30%) APHE was defined based on the thickest thickness of rim APHE compared with the tumor radius, and a modified LI-RADS emphasizing thin-rim APHE as a specific feature of LR-M was established. We compared the diagnostic performance of modified LR-M and LI-RADS 5 (LR-5) with the conventional one. Results: Thin-rim APHE and targetoid diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) were found as independent predictive factors of non-HCC malignancies, while enhancing capsule, thick-rim APHE and peripheral washout were noted as independent variables significantly associated with HCC of LR-M (P<0.05). The noticeable diagnostic performance of thin-rim APHE in distinguishing non-HCC malignancies from HCCs using the ROC curve. Emphasizing thin-rim APHE on targetoid features, the modified LR-M revealed significantly superior specificity and accuracy (89.4% vs 81.1%, P=0.004; and 87.9% vs 82.2%, P=0.027, respectively) while maintaining high sensitivity (82.2% vs 86.0%; P=0.529) compared with the LR-M. Meanwhile, the modified LR-5 achieved greater sensitivity and accuracy (88.6% vs 79.7%, P=0.004; and 85.8% vs 80.1%, P=0.036, respectively) for diagnosing HCC, without compromising specificity (78.3% vs.81.1%; P=0.608) compared with the LR-5. Conclusion: Thin-rim APHE may be the specific imaging feature for differentiating non-HCC malignancies from HCCs within LR-M. The modified targetoid criteria emphasizing thin-rim APHE can improve the diagnostic performance of LI-RADS for hepatic malignancies.

Based on Gadolinium Ethoxybenzyl DTPA-Enhanced MRI: Diagnostic Performance of the Category-Modified LR-5 Criteria in Patients At Risk for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Introduction: We aimed to modify the LR-5 strategy to improve the diagnostic sensitivity for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in high-risk patients while maintaining specificity. Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed 412 patients with 445 liver observations who underwent preoperative gadolinium ethoxybenzyl DTPA (GD-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced MRI followed by surgical procedures or biopsies. All observations were classified according to LI-RADS v2018, and the classifications were adjusted by modifying major features (MF)(substituting threshold growth with a more HCC-specific ancillary features (AF): presence of blood products within the mass, arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) was interpreted with hypointensity on precontrast imaging- isointensity in arterial phase (AP) and extending washout to transitional phase (TP)(2 min)). The specificity, sensitivity, and positive predictive value (PPV) were assessed to compare LR-5 (definitely HCC) diagnostic efficacy between LI-RADS version 2018 and modified LI-RADS. Results: Apart from nonenhancing "capsule", the interreader agreement of MFs and HCC-specific AFs between the two readers reached substantial or excellent ranges (κ values ranging from 0.631 to 0.911). According to LI-5 v2018, the specificity, sensitivity and PPV of HCC were 90.74%, 82.35%, and 98.17%, respectively. Based on a more HCC-specific AF, signal intensity in AP and TP (2 min), the sensitivity of the three modified strategies were 86.19%, 93.09%, 96.67% (P < .05)), while maintaining high specificity and PPV rates at 88.89% and 98.25% (P > .05) Conclusion: Further investigation into the efficacy of threshold growth as a MF is warranted. By utilizing GD-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI, enhancing the sensitivity of the modified LR-5 category may be achieved without compromising specificity and PPV in diagnosing HCC among high-risk patients.

The comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI LI-RADS for nodules ≤2 cm in patients at high risk for HCC: a prospective study.

Objectives: To investigate the consistency of LI-RADS of CEUS and EOB-MRI in the categorization of liver nodules ≤2cm in patients at high risk for HCC. Methods: Patients at high risk for HCC with nodules ≤2cm who underwent CEUS and EOB-MRI in our hospital were prospectively enrolled. The CEUS images and EOB-MRI imaging of each liver nodule were observed to evaluate inter-observer consistency and category according to CEUS LI-RADS V2017 and CT/MRI LI-RADS V2017 criteria double blinded. Pathology and/or follow-up were used as reference standard. Results: A total of 127 nodules in 119 patients met the inclusion criteria. The inter-observer agreement was good on CEUS and EOB-MRI LI-RADS (kappa = 0.76, 0.76 p < 0.001). The inter-modality agreement was fair (kappa=0.21, p < 0.001). There was no statistical difference in PPV and specificity between CEUS and EOB-MRI LR-5 for HCC, while the difference in AUC was statistically significant. We used new criteria (CEUS LR-5 and EOB-MRI LR-4/5 or CEUS LR-4/5 and EOB-MRI LR-5) to diagnose HCC. The sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of this criteria was 63.4%, 95.6%, and 0.80. Conclusions: CEUS and EOB-MRI showed fair inter-modality agreement in LI-RADS categorization of nodules ≤2 cm. The inter-observer agreement of CEUS and EOB-MRI LI-RADS were substantial. CEUS and EOB-MRI LR-5 have equally good positive predictive value and specificity for HCC ≤ 2cm, and combining these two modalities may better diagnose HCC ≤ 2 cm. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier NCT04212286.

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.

LI-RADS version 2018 treatment response algorithm on extracellular contrast-enhanced MRI in patients treated with transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: diagnostic performance and the added value of ancillary features.

BACKGROUND: The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) Treatment Response Algorithm (TRA) (LI-RADS TRA) is used for assessing response of HCC to locoregional therapy (LRT), however, the value of ancillary features (AFs) for TACE-treated HCCs has not been extensively investigated on extracellular agent MRI (ECA-MRI). PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of LI-RADS v2018 TRA on ECA-MRI for HCC treated with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and the value of ancillary features. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients who underwent TACE for HCC and then followed by hepatic surgery between January 2019 and June 2023 with both pre- and post-TACE contrast-enhanced MRI available. Two radiologists independently evaluated the post-treated lesions on MRI using LI-RADS treatment response (TR) (LR-TR) algorithm and modified LR-TR (mLR-TR) algorithm in which ancillary features (restricted diffusion and intermediate T2-weighted hyperintensity) were added, respectively. Lesions were categorized as complete pathologic necrosis (100%, CPN) and non-complete pathologic necrosis (< 100%, non-CPN) on the basis of surgical pathology. The diagnostic performance in predicting viable and non-viable tumors based on LR-TR and mLR-TR algorithms was compared using the McNemar test. Interreader agreement was calculated by using Cohen's weighted and unweighted κ. RESULTS: A total of 61 patients [mean age 59 years ± 10 (standard deviation); 47 men] with 79 lesions (57 pathologically viable) were included. For non-CPN prediction, the sensitivity, specificity of LR-TR viable and mLR-TR viable category were 75% (43 of 57), 82% (18 of 22) and 88% (50 of 57), 77% (17 of 22), respectively, the sensitivity of mLR-TR was significantly higher than that of LR-TR (P = 0.016) without difference in specificity (P = 1.000). Interreader agreement for LR-TR and mLR-TR category was moderate (k = 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.33, 0.67, k = 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.20, 0.63). The sensitivity of both LR-TR and mLR-TR algorithms in predicting viable tumors between conventional TACE (cTACE) and drug-eluting beads TACE (DEB-TACE) did not have significant difference (cTACE: 76%, 89% vs. DEB-TACE: 73%, 82%). CONCLUSIONS: On ECA-MRI, applying ancillary features to LI-RADS v2018 TRA can improve the sensitivity in predicting pathologic tumor viability in patients treated with TACE for hepatocellular carcinoma with no significant difference in specificity.

Diagnostic Model for Proliferative HCC Using LI-RADS: Assessing Therapeutic Outcomes in Hepatectomy and TKI-ICI Combination.

BACKGROUND: Proliferative hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), aggressive with poor prognosis, and lacks reliable MRI diagnosis. PURPOSE: To develop a diagnostic model for proliferative HCC using liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) and assess its prognostic value. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. POPULATION: 241 HCC patients underwent hepatectomy (90 proliferative HCCs: 151 nonproliferative HCCs), divided into the training (N = 167) and validation (N = 74) sets. 57 HCC patients received combination therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3.0 T, T1- and T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, in- and out-phase, T1 high resolution isotropic volume excitation and dynamic gadoxetic acid-enhanced imaging. ASSESSMENT: LI-RADS v2018 and other MRI features (intratumoral artery, substantial hypoenhancing component, hepatobiliary phase peritumoral hypointensity, and irregular tumor margin) were assessed. A diagnostic model for proliferative HCC was established, stratifying patients into high- and low-risk groups. Follow-up occurred every 3-6 months, and recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in different groups were compared. STATISTICAL TESTS: Fisher's test or chi-square test, t-test or Mann-Whitney test, logistic regression, Harrell's concordance index (C-index), Kaplan-Meier curves, and Cox proportional hazards. Significance level: P < 0.05. RESULTS: The diagnostic model, incorporating corona enhancement, rim arterial phase hyperenhancement, infiltrative appearance, intratumoral artery, and substantial hypoenhancing component, achieved a C-index of 0.823 (training set) and 0.804 (validation set). Median follow-up was 32.5 months (interquartile range [IQR], 25.1 months) for postsurgery patients, and 16.8 months (IQR: 13.2 months) for combination-treated patients. 99 patients experienced recurrence, and 30 demonstrated tumor nonresponse. Differences were significant in RFS and OS rates between high-risk and low-risk groups post-surgery (40.3% vs. 65.8%, 62.3% vs. 90.1%, at 5 years). In combination-treated patients, PFS rates differed significantly (80.6% vs. 7.7% at 2 years). DATA CONCLUSION: The MR-based model could pre-treatment identify proliferative HCC and assist in prognosis evaluation. TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography Combined With LR-M Classification Criteria for Differentiating Malignant Liver Nodules at High Risk for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the value of quantitative parameters derived from dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (DCE-US) and a combination of these quantitative parameters with the LR-M classification criteria in distinguishing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) nodules and non-HCC malignancies. METHODS: HCC and non-HCC malignant nodules were grouped using pathologic results, and each nodule was classified using CEUS LI-RADS 2017. Quantitative CEUS analysis of each nodule was performed using VueBox, and quantitative parameters were compared between the HCC and non-HCC groups. The diagnostic efficacy of the LR-5 category for HCC was analyzed using the LR-M classification criteria along with time-related quantitative parameters. RESULTS: Of the 190 malignant liver nodules, 137 and 53 were HCCs and non-HCC malignancies, respectively. The median values of quantitative parameters RT (rise time), TTP (time to peak), mTTl (mean transit time local), and FT (fall time) in the non-HCC malignant group were lower than those in the HCC group, with p < 0.05. There was a statistically significant difference in WiAUC (wash-in area under the curve), WoAUC (wash-out area under the curve), WiWoAUC (wash-in and wash-out area under the curve), and WoR (wash-out rate) values between HCC and non-HCC malignant groups, with p < 0.05. Using LR-M washout time <60 s and FT ≤21.2 s as the new diagnostic standard, the LR-5 category showed a sensitivity of 83.9%, specificity of 96.2%, and positive predictive value of 98.3% for HCC diagnosis. CONCLUSION: DCE-US can facilitate the distinction of HCCs and non-HCC malignancies. Non-HCC malignancies present with earlier peak enhancement and more rapid and marked washout than HCC nodules. The combination of the LR-M classification criteria and FT ≤21.2 s can significantly improve the diagnostic sensitivity of the LR-5 category for HCC.

Systematic training of LI-RADS CT v2018 improves interobserver agreements and performances in LR categorization for focal liver lesions.

AIM: To retrospectively explored whether systematic training in the use of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018 on computed tomography (CT) can improve the interobserver agreements and performances in LR categorization for focal liver lesions (FLLs) among different radiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 18 visiting radiologists and the liver multiphase CT images of 70 hepatic observations in 63 patients at high risk of HCC were included in this study. The LI-RADS v2018 training procedure included three thematic lectures, with an interval of 1 month. After each seminar, the radiologists had 1 month to adopt the algorithm into their daily work. The interobserver agreements and performances in LR categorization for FLLs among the radiologists before and after training were compared. RESULTS: After training, the interobserver agreements in classifying the LR categories for all radiologists were significantly increased for most LR categories (P < 0.001), except for LR-1 (P = 0.053). After systematic training, the areas under the curve (AUCs) for LR categorization performance for all participants were significantly increased for most LR categories (P < 0.001), except for LR-1 (P = 0.062). CONCLUSION: Systematic training in the use of the LI-RADS can improve the interobserver agreements and performances in LR categorization for FLLs among radiologists with different levels of experience.

Evaluation of the Time Difference Method in Identifying Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Current CEUS LR-M Category Nodules.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the work described here was to explore a potential method for improving the diagnostic detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) based on the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) Version 2017. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 585 liver nodules in 427 patients at risk for HCC from December 2020 to March 2023. The nodules were categorized as LR-1 to LR-M based on CEUS LI-RADS Version 2017 and were randomly subclassified into a developmental cohort (DC) and a validation cohort (VC) at 3:1. In the DC, the cutoff value of the time difference (∆T) for differentiating HCC from other malignancies by LR-M was calculated and used to reclassify nodules in the VC. The diagnostic effect on HCC detection before and after reclassification was further assessed. RESULTS: According to the current CEUS LI-RADS, 140 of 426 (32.9%) confirmed HCC nodules were misclassified as LR-M. In the DC (439 nodules), the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve revealed that the cutoff value of ∆T (wash-out onset time minus contrast arrival time) recommended for HCC diagnosis was greater than 21 s. In the VC (146 nodules), 34 HCCs were correctly categorized as LR-5 according to the cutoff value, and after reclassification, LR-5 had higher accuracy (67.1% vs. 89.0%, p < 0.001) and sensitivity (56.0% vs. 87.2%, p < 0.001) for HCC diagnosis with high specificity (100% vs. 94.6%, p = 0.500). CONCLUSION: Using the time difference method could identify HCC nodules misdiagnosed as LR-M and improve the diagnostic performance of current CEUS LI-RADS.

A multi-parameter intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma scoring system based on modified contrast-enhanced ultrasound LI-RADS M criteria for differentiating intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To develop a multi-parameter intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) scoring system and compare its diagnostic performance with contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) liver imaging reporting and data system M (LR-M) criteria for differentiating ICC from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled 62 high-risk patients with ICCs and 62 high-risk patients with matched HCCs between January 2022 and December 2022 from two institutions. The CEUS LR-M criteria was modified by adjusting the early wash-out onset (within 45 s) and the marked wash-out (within 3 min). Then, a multi-parameter ICC scoring system was established based on clinical features, B-mode ultrasound features, and modified LR-M criteria. RESULT: We found that elevated CA 19-9 (OR=12.647), lesion boundary (OR=11.601), peripheral rim-like arterial phase hyperenhancement (OR=23.654), early wash-out onset (OR=7.211), and marked wash-out (OR=19.605) were positive predictors of ICC, whereas elevated alpha-fetoprotein (OR=0.078) was a negative predictor. Based on these findings, an ICC scoring system was established. Compared with the modified LR-M and LR-M criteria, the ICC scoring system showed the highest area under the curve (0.911 vs. 0.831 and 0.750, both p<0.05) and specificity (0.935 vs. 0.774 and 0.565, both p<0.05). Moreover, the numbers of HCCs categorized as LR-M decreased from 27 (43.5%) to 14 (22.6%) and 4 (6.5%) using the modified LR-M criteria and ICC scoring system, respectively. CONCLUSION: The modified LR-M criteria-based multi-parameter ICC scoring system had the highest specificity for diagnosing ICC and reduced the number of HCC cases diagnosed as LR-M category.

Up-to-Date Role of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System in Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

This article overviews Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS), a system that standardizes techniques, interpretation and reporting of imaging studies done for hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance, diagnosis, and locoregional treatment response assessment. LI-RADS includes 4 algorithms, each of which defines ordinal categories reflecting probability of the assessed outcome. The categories, in turn, guide patient management. The LI-RADS diagnostic algorithms provide diagnostic criteria for the entire spectrum of lesions found in at-risk patients. In addition, the use of LI-RADS in clinical care improves clarity of communication between radiologists and clinicians and may improve the performance of inexperienced users to the levels of expert liver imagers.

Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System in Hepatocellular Carcinoma ≤5 cm: Biological Characteristics and Patient Outcomes.

Introduction: The present study aimed to evaluate the influence of biological characteristics of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2017 category of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in patients with high risk and compare the outcomes among different categories after radical resection. Methods: Between June 2017 and December 2020, standardized CEUS data of liver nodules were prospectively collected from multiple centers across China. We conducted a retrospective analysis of the prospectively collected data on HCCs measuring no more than 5 cm, as diagnosed by pathology. LI-RADS categories were assigned after thorough evaluation of CEUS features. Then, CEUS LI-RADS categories and major features were compared in different differentiation, Ki-67, and microvascular invasion (MVI) statuses. Differences in recurrence-free survival (RFS) among different LI-RADS categories were further analyzed. Results: A total of 293 HCC nodules in 293 patients were included. This study revealed significant differences in the CEUS LI-RADS category of HCCs among differentiation (p < 0.001) and levels of Ki-67 (p = 0.01) and that poor differentiation (32.7% in LR-M, 12% in LR-5, and 6.2% in LR-4) (p < 0.001) and high level of Ki-67 (median value 30%) were more frequently classified into the LR-M category, whereas well differentiation (37.5% in LR-4, 15.1% in LR-5, and 11.5% in LR-M) and low levels of Ki-67 (median value 11%) were more frequently classified into the LR-4 category. No significant differences were found between MVI and CEUS LI-RADS categories (p > 0.05). With a median follow-up of 23 months, HCCs assigned to different CEUS LI-RADS classes showed no significant differences in RFS after resection. Conclusions: Biological characteristics of HCC, including differentiation and level of Ki-67 expression, could influence major features of CEUS and impact the CEUS LI-RADS category. HCCs in different CEUS LI-RADS categories showed no significant differences in RFS after resection.

Microvascular invasion-negative hepatocellular carcinoma: Prognostic value of qualitative and quantitative Gd-EOB-DTPA MRI analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to establish a model for predicting the prognosis of patients with microvascular invasion (MVI)-negative hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) based on qualitative and quantitative analyses of Gd-EOB-DTPA magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with MVI-negative HCC who underwent preoperative Gd-EOB-DTPA MRI between January 2015 and December 2019 were retrospectively enrolled.In total, 122 patients were randomly assigned to the training and validation groups at a ratio of 7:3. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify significant clinical parameters and MRI features, including quantitative and qualitative parameters associated with prognosis, which were incorporated into a predictive nomogram. The end-point of this study was recurrence-free survival. Outcomes were compared between groups using the Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test. RESULTS: During a median follow-up period of 58.86 months, 38 patients (31.15 %) experienced recurrence. Multivariate analysis revealed that lower relative enhancement ratio (RER), hepatobiliary phase hypointensity without arterial phase hyperenhancement, Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System category, mild-moderate T2 hyperintensity, and higher aspartate aminotransferase levels were risk factors associated with prognosis and then incorporated into the prognostic model. C-indices for training and validation groups were 0.732 and 0.692, respectively. The most appropriate cut-off value for RER was 1.197. Patients with RER ≤ 1.197 had significantly higher postoperative recurrence rates than those with RER > 1.197 (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: The model integrating qualitative and quantitative imaging parameters and clinical parameters satisfactorily predicted the prognosis of patients with MVI-negative HCC.

Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018: differential diagnostic value of ADC values for benign and malignant nodules with moderate probability (LR-3).

Objective: To evaluate the usefulness of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in differentiating between benign and malignant LR-3 lesions classified by Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System 2018 (LI-RADS v2018). Methods: Retrospectively analyzed 88 patients with liver nodules confirmed by pathology and classified as LR-3 by LI-RADS. All patients underwent preoperative contrast-enhanced MR examination, and the following patient-related imaging features were collected: tumor size,nonrim APHE, nonperipheral "washout", enhancing "capsule", mild-moderate T2 hyperintensity, fat in mass, restricted diffusion, and nodule-in-nodule architecture. We performed ROC analysis and calculated the sensitivity and specificity. Results: A total of 122 lesions were found in 88 patients, with 68 benign and 54 malignant lesions. The mean ADC value for malignant and benign lesions were 1.01 ± 0.15 × 103 mm2/s and 1.41 ± 0.31 × 103 mm2/s, respectively. The ADC value of malignant lesions was significantly lower than that of benign lesions, p < 0.0001. Compared with other imaging features, ADC values had the highest AUC (AUC = 0.909), with a sensitivity of 92.6% and a specificity of 74.1% for the differentiation of benign and malignant lesions. Conclusions: ADC values are useful for differentiating between benign and malignant liver nodules in LR-3 classification, it improves the sensitivity of LI-RADS in the diagnosis of HCC while maintaining high specificity, and we recommend including ADC values in the standard interpretation of LI-RADSv2018.

Differences between CEUS LI-RADS and CECT LI-RADS in the diagnosis of focal liver lesions in patients at risk for HCC.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the inter-modality consistency and diagnostic performances of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) LI-RADS in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), so as to help clinicians to select a more appropriate modality to follow the focal liver lesions (FLLs). METHODS: This retrospective study included untreated 277 FLLs from 247 patients who underwent both CEUS and CECT within 1 month. The ultrasound contrast medium used was SonoVue. FLL categories were independently assigned by two ultrasound physicians and two radiologists using CEUS LI-RADS v2017 and CECT LI-RADS v2018, respectively. The diagnostic performances of CEUS and CECT LI-RADS were evaluated using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value. Cohen's Kappa was employed to evaluate the concordance of the LI-RADS category. RESULTS: The inter-modality consistency for CEUS and CECT LI-RADS was 0.31 (p < 0.001). HCC was more frequently observed in CECT LR-3 and LR-4 hepatic lesions than in CEUS (7.3% vs. 19.5%, p < 0.001). The specificity and PPV of CEUS and CECT LR-5 for the diagnosis of HCC were 89.5%, 95.0%, and 82.5%, 94.4%, respectively. The sensitivity of CEUS LR-5 + LR-M for the diagnosis of hepatic malignancies was higher than that of CECT (93.7% vs. 82.7%, p < 0.001). The specificity and PPV of CEUS LR-M for the diagnosis of non-HCC malignancies were lower than those of CECT (59.7% vs. 95.5%, p < 0.001; 23.4% vs. 70.3%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The inter-modality consistency between the CEUS and CECT LI-RADS categories is fair. CEUS LI-RADS was more sensitive than CECT LI-RADS in terms of identifying hepatic malignancies, but weaker in terms of separating HCC from non-HCC malignancies.

Performance of current versus modified CEUS LI-RADS in the diagnosis of non-hepatocellular carcinoma malignancies.

PURPOSE: The high proportion of HCC in CEUS LR-M decreases the sensitivity of LR-5 for the diagnosis of HCC. However, when modifying LR-M criteria to further improve the sensitivity of LR-5, it is also important not to compromise the diagnostic performance (especially sensitivity) of LR-M for non-hepatocellular carcinoma malignancies (non-HCCMs). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of CEUS LI-RADS (2017 version) for non-HCCMs and to explore the impact of modified CEUS LI-RADS on the diagnostic performance of LR-M. METHODS: In this retrospective study, patients with pathologically confirmed non-HCCMs were evaluated. Two radiologists independently interpreted the major CEUS features and categorized the liver lesions. New LR-M criteria were applied: early washout (< 45 s) or marked washout (< 5 min). The sensitivity values of the current and modified CEUS LR-M were assessed and then compared using a paired χ2 test. Cohen's κ was used to compare the inter-reader agreement of the LI-RADS categories. RESULTS: A total of 131 non-HCCMs were ultimately selected, including 71 intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas, 26 combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinomas, 29 metastases, and 5 other non-HCCMs. The numbers of LR-M, LR-5, LR-4, and LR-3 in liver lesions were 111, 18, 1, and 1, respectively. The inter-reader agreement of the LI-RADS categories for non-HCCMs was 0.59. The sensitivity of the current CEUS LR-M in diagnosing non-HCCMs was 84.7%. By adjusting the early washout time to < 45 s, the sensitivity of LR-M was 80.9%. By adjusting the marked washout time within 5 min, the sensitivity of LR-M was 72.5%. CONCLUSION: CEUS LR-M has high sensitivity in diagnosing non-HCCMs. For LR-M nodules with nonrim arterial phase hyperenhancement and early washout, advancing the time of early washout to < 45 s has a minimal impact on the sensitivity of LR-M in diagnosing non-HCCMs compared to the condition of increasing the marked washout within 5 min.

Prevalence of different LI-RADS v2018 categories in high-risk patients undergoing CT- or MRI-based screening for hepatocellular carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To estimate the prevalence of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS, LR) v2018 categories reported on CT or MRI performed for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included all reports for CT and MRI exams performed for HCC screening patients between 8/2018 and 4/2020. Patients with ultrasound, CT, or MRI of the abdomen within two years of the index exam were excluded. From each radiology report, we extracted number of reported liver observations, and LI-RADS v2018 category for each observation. RESULTS: There were 329 patients (170 [52%] male, mean age 59 years [SD 12]), of whom 177 (54%) had MRI with gadoxetate, 72 (22%) had MRI with extracellular contrast, 7 (2%) had MRI with unspecified contrast, and 73 (22%) had CT. Of 329 patients, 199 (60%) had no reported observations; 130 patients had 166 reported observations: 114 (68.7%) LR-1, 8 (4.8%) LR-2, 21 (12.6%) LR-3, 6 (3.6%) LR-4, 13 (7.8%) LR-5, 3 (1.8%) LR-M, and 1 (0.6%) LR-TIV. Of 114 LR-1 observations, 78 (68%) were cysts, 17 (15%) were hemangiomas, 12 (11%) were vascular shunts, 3 (3%) were focal nodular hyperplasia, 2 (2%) were siderotic nodules, 1 (1%) was a lipoma, and 1 (1%) was biliary hamartoma. There were 23 observations with probably or definitely malignant categories (LR-4, LR-5, LR-M or LR- TIV), reported in 20/329 (6%) of patients. CONCLUSION: In a cohort of at-risk patients undergoing contrast-enhanced CT/MRI for HCC screening, 60% of had no liver observations, and 6 % had probably or definitely malignant observations. IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENT CARE: The prevalence of LI-RADS v2018 categories on CT or MR exams used for HCC screening can help develop screening criteria and assess cost-effectiveness of surveillance strategies with CT and MRI.

A model incorporating clinicopathologic and liver imaging reporting and data system-based magnetic resonance imaging features to identify hepatocellular carcinoma in LR-M observations.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the predictive value of a combination model of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS)-based magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and clinicopathologic features to identify atypical hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in LI-RADS category M (LR-M) observations. METHODS: A total of 105 patients with HCC based on surgery or biopsy who underwent preoperative MRI were retrospectively reviewed in the training group from hospital-1 between December 2016 and November 2020. The LI-RADS-based MRI features and clinicopathologic data were compared between LR-M HCC and non-HCC groups. Univariate and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression analyses were used to select the features. Binary logistic regression analysis was then conducted to estimate potential predictors of atypical HCC. A predictive nomogram was established based on the combination of MRI and clinicopathologic features and further validated using an independent external set of data from hospital-2. RESULTS: Of 113 observations from 105 patients (mean age, 61 years; 77 men) in the training set, 47 (41.59%) were classified as LR-M HCC. Following multivariate analysis, aspartate aminotransferase >40 U/L [odds ratio (OR): 4.65], alpha-fetoprotein >20 ng/mL (OR: 13.04), surface retraction (OR: 0.16), enhancing capsule (OR: 5.24), blood products in mass (OR: 8.2), and iso/hypoenhancement on delayed phase (OR: 10.26) were found to be independently correlated with LR-M HCC. The corresponding area under the curve for a combined model-based nomogram was 0.95 in the training patients (n = 113) and 0.90 in the validation cohort (n = 53). CONCLUSION: The combined model incorporating clinicopathologic and MRI features demonstrated a satisfactory prediction result for LR-M HCC.

Efficacy of Multiple Modified Methods of Criteria for LR-M Liver Nodules of Different Sizes: Clinical Practice and Discussion in CEUS LI-RADS Version 2017.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic performance of the modified LR-M method of CEUS LI-RADS version 2017 with nodules of different sizes. METHODS: This retrospective study included consecutive patients with high risk for HCC who underwent CEUS between 2019 and 2021, demonstrating an LR-M observed using CEUS LI-RADS version 2017. Four modified LR-M methods were used to evaluate nodules of different sizes. The diagnostic performances of the four modified LR-M methods were assessed in LR-M nodules of different sizes by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). RESULTS: The 261 patients with LR-M observations included 166 HCCs and 95 non-HCCs. A total of 133 nodules were <30 mm and defined as group A, 78 nodules were 30-50 mm in size and defined as group B, and 50 nodules were >50 mm and defined as group C. The AUCs between criterion I, II, III, and IV were not significantly different in all LR-M nodules. The AUCs of the ROC curves between criterion I, II, III, and IV were not significantly different in group A. However, the AUC of criterion IV was significantly higher than that of criterion I and III in group B, and the AUCs of criterion I and criterion III were both not significant in group B; the AUC of criterion IV was not significant in group C. CONCLUSIONS: The modified LR-M method could moderate the detection effectiveness in differentiating HCC from other lesions. According to tumor size, the selection of appropriate modified LR-M diagnostic criteria could effectively improve the diagnostic performance of LR-M.