Diagnosis of Non-Hepatocellular Carcinoma Malignancies in Patients With Risks for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: CEUS LI-RADS Versus CT/MRI LI-RADS

ObjectiveData regarding direct comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) and Computed Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging (CT/MR) LI-RADS in diagnosis of non-hepatocelluar carcinoma (non-HCC) malignancies remain limited. Our study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of the CEUS LI-RADS version 2017 and CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 for diagnosing non-HCC malignancies in patients with risks for HCC.Materials and MethodsIn this retrospective study, 94 liver nodules pathologically-confirmed as non-HCC malignancies in 92 patients at risks for HCC from January 2009 to December 2018 were enrolled. The imaging features and the LI-RADS categories on corresponding CEUS and CT/MRI within 1 month were retrospectively analyzed according to the ACR CEUS LI-RADS v2017 and ACR CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 by two radiologists in consensus for each algorithm. The sensitivity of LR-M category, inter-reader agreement and inter-modality agreement was compared between these two standardized algorithms.ResultsNinety-four nodules in 92 patients (mean age, 54 years ± 10 [standard deviation] with 65 men [54 years ± 11] and 27 women [54 years ± 8]), including 56 intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas, 34 combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinomas, two adenosquamous carcinomas of the liver, one primary hepatic neuroendocrine carcinoma and one hepatic undifferentiated sarcoma were included. On CEUS, numbers of lesions classified as LR-3, LR-4, LR-5 and LR-M were 0, 1, 10 and 83, and on CT/MRI, the corresponding numbers were 3, 0, 14 and 77. There was no significant difference in the sensitivity of LR-M between these two standardized algorithms (88.3% of CEUS vs 81.9% of CT/MRI, p = 0.210). Seventy-seven lesions (81.9%) were classified as the same LI-RADS categories by both standardized algorithms (five for LR-5 and 72 for LR-M, kappa value = 0.307). In the subgroup analysis for ICC and CHC, no significant differences were found in the sensitivity of LR-M category between these two standardized algorithms (for ICC, 94.6% of CEUS vs 89.3% of CT/MRI, p = 0.375; for CHC, 76.5% of CEUS vs 70.6% of CT/MRI, p = 0. 649).ConclusionCEUS LI-RADS v2017 and CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018 showed similar value for diagnosing non-HCC primary hepatic malignancies in patients with risks.

ACCURACY OF CT-SCAN FOR THE DETECTION OF MALIGNANT LIVER MASS

Background: Malignant liver mass, especially hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), is the most common primary malignant tumour of the liver representing more than 80% of all primary hepatic malignancies. Methods: This cross sectional study was carried out in the Department of Radiology. All the clinically suspected patients having hepatic mass at any age with both sexes who were attended in hospital were taken as study population as per inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients having hepatomegaly due to extra hepatic causes, patients who refused to undergo CT-scan, patients who refuse to do biopsy or whose biopsy result was not available and patients having known hypersensitivity reaction to contrast agent were excluded from this study. Results: Sensitivity of CT to diagnose malignant lesion was 94.12%, specificity 84.62%, accuracy 90%, positive predictive value 88.89% and negative predictive value 91.67%. Conclusion: The results of the present study therefore conclude that CT is a useful modality for the diagnosis of malignant liver masses. Since the CT diagnosis correlates with histopathological connection, it is a sensitive modality on the basis of the above findings. Keywords: Test accuracy, CT-Scan, Malignant, Liver Mass