LI-RADS v2018 category and imaging features: inter-modality agreement between contrast-enhanced CT, gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI, and extracellular contrast-enhanced MRI

被引:0
|
作者
Agnello, Francesco [1 ]
Cannella, Roberto [1 ]
Brancatelli, Giuseppe [1 ]
Galia, Massimo [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Palermo, Dept Radiol, Policlin Paolo Giaccone, Via Vespro 127, I-90127 Palermo, Italy
来源
RADIOLOGIA MEDICA | 2024年 / 129卷 / 11期
关键词
LI-RADS; CT; MRI; Liver; Contrast media; GD-EOB-DTPA; FOCAL LIVER-LESIONS; SMALL HEPATOCELLULAR-CARCINOMA; COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY; DELAYED PHASE; DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCE; SIGNAL-INTENSITY; HEPATIC NODULES; CIRRHOTIC LIVER; ACID;
D O I
10.1007/s11547-024-01879-8
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
PurposeTo perform an intra-individual comparison of LI-RADS category and imaging features in patients at high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on contrast-enhanced CT, gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI (EOB-MRI), and extracellular agent-enhanced MRI (ECA-MRI) and to analyze the diagnostic performance of each imaging modality.MethodThis retrospective study included cirrhotic patients with at least one LR-3, LR-4, LR-5, LR-M or LR-TIV observation imaged with at least two imaging modalities among CT, EOB-MRI, or ECA-MRI. Two radiologists evaluated the observations using the LI-RADS v2018 diagnostic algorithm. Reference standard included pathologic confirmation and imaging criteria according to LI-RADS v2018. Imaging features were compared between different exams using the McNemar test. Inter-modality agreement was calculated by using the weighted Cohen's kappa (k) test.ResultsA total of 144 observations (mean size 34.0 +/- 32.4 mm) in 96 patients were included. There were no significant differences in the detection of major and ancillary imaging features between the three imaging modalities. When considering all the observations, inter-modality agreement for category assignment was substantial between CT and EOB-MRI (k 0.60; 95%CI 0.44, 0.75), moderate between CT and ECA-MRI (k 0.46; 95%CI 0.22, 0.69) and substantial between EOB-MRI and ECA-MRI (k 0.72; 95%CI 0.59, 0.85). In observations smaller than 20 mm, inter-modality agreement was fair between CT and EOB-MRI (k 0.26; 95%CI 0.05, 0.47), moderate between CT and ECA-MRI (k 0.42; 95%CI -0.02, 0.88), and substantial between EOB-MRI and ECA-MRI (k 0.65; 95%CI 0.47, 0.82). ECA-MRI demonstrated the highest sensitivity (70%) and specificity (100%) when considering LR-5 as predictor of HCC.ConclusionsInter-modality agreement between CT, ECA-MRI, and EOB-MRI decreases in observations smaller than 20 mm. ECA-MRI has the provided higher sensitivity for the diagnosis of HCC.
引用
收藏
页码:1575 / 1586
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] LI-RADS v2018: utilizing ancillary features on gadoxetate-enhanced MRI to modify final LI-RADS category
    Christine Boatright
    Jessica Peterson
    Vanessa L. Williams
    Shaun Best
    Ryan Ash
    Abdominal Radiology, 2020, 45 : 3136 - 3143
  • [2] Contrast-enhanced ultrasound LI-RADS 2017: comparison with CT/MRI LI-RADS
    Ding, Jianmin
    Long, Lei
    Zhang, Xiang
    Chen, Chen
    Zhou, Hongyu
    Zhou, Yan
    Wang, Yandong
    Jing, Xiang
    Ye, Zhaoxiang
    Wang, Fengmei
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2021, 31 (02) : 847 - 854
  • [3] LI-RADS v2018: utilizing ancillary features on gadoxetate-enhanced MRI to modify final LI-RADS category
    Boatright, Christine
    Peterson, Jessica
    Williams, Vanessa L.
    Best, Shaun
    Ash, Ryan
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2020, 45 (10) : 3136 - 3143
  • [4] Contrast-enhanced ultrasound LI-RADS 2017: comparison with CT/MRI LI-RADS
    Jianmin Ding
    Lei Long
    Xiang Zhang
    Chen Chen
    Hongyu Zhou
    Yan Zhou
    Yandong Wang
    Xiang Jing
    Zhaoxiang Ye
    Fengmei Wang
    European Radiology, 2021, 31 : 847 - 854
  • [5] LI-RADS technical requirements for CT, MRI, and contrast-enhanced ultrasound
    Avinash R. Kambadakone
    Alice Fung
    Rajan T. Gupta
    Thomas A. Hope
    Kathryn J. Fowler
    Andrej Lyshchik
    Karthik Ganesan
    Vahid Yaghmai
    Alexander R. Guimaraes
    Dushyant V. Sahani
    Frank H. Miller
    Abdominal Radiology, 2018, 43 : 56 - 74
  • [6] 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
    Qin, Zhengyi
    Zhou, Yan
    Zhang, Xiang
    Ding, Jianmin
    Zhou, Hongyu
    Wang, Yandong
    Zhao, Lin
    Chen, Chen
    Jing, Xiang
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2024, 14
  • [7] Increasing the sensitivity of LI-RADS v2018 for diagnosis of small (10–19 mm) HCC on extracellular contrast-enhanced MRI
    Jingbiao Chen
    Sichi Kuang
    Yao Zhang
    Wenjie Tang
    Sidong Xie
    Linqi Zhang
    Dailin Rong
    Bingjun He
    Ying Deng
    Yuanqiang Xiao
    Wenqi Shi
    Kathryn Fowler
    Jin Wang
    Claude B. Sirlin
    Abdominal Radiology, 2021, 46 : 1530 - 1542
  • [8] Increasing the sensitivity of LI-RADS v2018 for diagnosis of small (10-19 mm) HCC on extracellular contrast-enhanced MRI
    Chen, Jingbiao
    Kuang, Sichi
    Zhang, Yao
    Tang, Wenjie
    Xie, Sidong
    Zhang, Linqi
    Rong, Dailin
    He, Bingjun
    Deng, Ying
    Xiao, Yuanqiang
    Shi, Wenqi
    Fowler, Kathryn
    Wang, Jin
    Sirlin, Claude B.
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2021, 46 (04) : 1530 - 1542
  • [9] LI-RADS ancillary features on contrast-enhanced ultrasonography
    Dietrich, Christoph F.
    Dong, Yi
    Kono, Yuko
    Caraiani, Cosmin
    Sirlin, Claude B.
    Cui, Xin-Wu
    Tang, An
    ULTRASONOGRAPHY, 2020, 39 (03) : 221 - 228
  • [10] Modifying LI-RADS on Gadoxetate Disodium-Enhanced MRI: A Secondary Analysis of a Prospective Observational Study
    Jiang, Hanyu
    Song, Bin
    Qin, Yun
    Konanur, Meghana
    Wu, Yuanan
    McInnes, Matthew D. F.
    Lafata, Kyle J.
    Bashir, Mustafa R.
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2022, 56 (02) : 399 - 412