Barrierefreiheit    Kontakt MedUni Wien    Intranet    MedUni Wien - Shop    Universitätsbibliothek    Universitätsklinikum AKH Wien  
 
 
 
 
 


    Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.). 2022 Mar 29. doi: 10.1002/hep.32494
    Reliability of extracellular contrast vs. gadoxetic acid in assessing small liver lesions using LI-RADS v.2018 and EASL criteria.
    Rimola J1,  Sapena V2,  Brancatelli G3,  Darnell A4,  Forzenigo L5,  Mähringer-Kunz A6,  Paisant A7,  Renzulli M8,  Schima W9,  Terraz S10,  Valls C11,  Wagner M12,  Ayuso C13,  Vilgrain V14,  Reig M15,  Ronot M16
    Author information
    Abstract

    BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The diagnostic accuracy of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v.2018 and European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) criteria for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma has been widely evaluated, but their reliability has not. We aimed to assess and compare the reliability of LI-RADS v.2018 and EASL criteria for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma using MRI with extracellular contrast agents (ECA) and gadoxetic acid (GA) and to determine the effect of ancillary features on LI-RADS reliability. Approach and Results Ten readers reviewed MRI studies of 92 focal liver lesions measuring <3 cm acquired with ECA and GA less than 1 month apart from two prospective trials, assessing EASL criteria, LI-RADS major and ancillary features, and LI-RADS categorization with and without including ancillary features. Inter-reader agreement for definite HCC diagnosis were substantial and similar for the two contrasts for both EASL and LI-RADS criteria. For ECA-MRI and GA-MRI, respectively, inter-reader agreement was k=0.72 (95%CI:0.63-0.81) and k=0.72 (95%CI:0.63-0.8) for nonrim hyperenhancement, k=0.63 (95%CI:0.54-0.72) and 0.57 (95%CI:0.48-0.66) for nonperipheral washout, and k=0.49 (95%CI:0.4-0.59) and k=0.48 (95%CI:0.37-0.58) for enhancing capsule. The inter-reader agreement for LI-RADS after applying ancillary features remained in the same range of agreement.

    CONCLUSION: Agreement for definite hepatocellular carcinoma was substantial and similar for both scoring systems and the two contrast agents in small focal liver lesions. The agreement for LI-RADS categorization was lower for both contrast agents, and including LI-RADS ancillary features did not improve the agreement.


    This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

    KEYWORDS: Cirrhosis, Hepatocellular carcinoma, Liver, Magnetic Resonance, contrast media

    Publikations ID: 35349760
    Quelle: öffnen
     
    Drucken
     
    ccc_logo_en.gif
    ccc_logo_en.gif
    ccc_logo_en.gif

    Schnellinfo

     
     

    Featured

     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    © MedUni Wien |
     Impressum | Nutzungsbedingungen | Kontakt