Clinical characteristics and outcomes of adrenal hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Although uncommon, adrenal hemorrhage has multiple etiologies. Because clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients with adrenal hemorrhage are inadequately described, we examined the underlying etiology, need for intervention, evolution of imaging characteristics, and adequacy of subsequent evaluation. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients diagnosed with adrenal hemorrhage (radiologist-confirmed density consistent with hemorrhage on computed tomography) from 2005 to 2021 at a university-based institution. Demographic characteristics, hemorrhage etiology, and subsequent follow-up were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 193 adrenal hemorrhage patients, the mean age was 49.2 ± 18.3 years, and 35% were female. Clinical presentations included trauma (47%), abdominal or flank pain (28%), incidental findings on imaging acquired for other reasons (12%), postoperative complication (8%), or shock (3%). Hemorrhage outside of the gland was present in 62% of patients. Unilateral hemorrhage was more frequent (93%) than bilateral (7%). A total of 12% of patients had nodules, but only 70% of these were identified on initial imaging, and only 43% had hormonal evaluation. Of 7 patients who had adrenalectomy or biopsy, pathology was either benign (57%) or nonadrenal malignancy (43%). No adrenocortical carcinomas were identified. Follow-up imaging was performed in 56% of patients and revealed decreased, stable, resolved, or increased adrenal hemorrhage size in 39%, 19%, 30%, and 12% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: Adrenal hemorrhage is secondary to multiple etiologies, most commonly trauma. In the setting of adrenal hemorrhage, many adrenal nodules were not identified on initial imaging. Only a minority of patients with nodules underwent "complete" biochemical evaluation. Follow-up imaging may improve the identification of underlying nodules needing hormonal evaluation.

Performance of CT With Adrenal-Washout Protocol in Heterogeneous Adrenal Nodules: A Multiinstitutional Study.

BACKGROUND. CT with adrenal-washout protocol (hereafter, adrenal-protocol CT) is commonly performed to distinguish adrenal adenomas from other adrenal tumors. However, the technique's utility among heterogeneous nodules is not well established, and the optimal method for placing ROIs in heterogeneous nodules is not clearly defined. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to determine the diagnostic performance of adrenal-protocol CT to distinguish adenomas from nonadenomas among heterogeneous adrenal nodules and to compare this performance among different methods for ROI placement. METHODS. This retrospective study included 164 patients (mean age, 59.1 years; 61 men, 103 women) with a total of 164 heterogeneous adrenal nodules evaluated using adrenal-protocol CT at seven institutions. All nodules had an available pathologic reference standard. A single investigator at each institution evaluated the CT images. ROIs were placed on portal venous phase images using four ROI methods: standard ROI, which refers to a single large ROI in the nodule's center; high ROI, a single ROI on the nodule's highest-attenuation area; low ROI, a single ROI the on nodule's lowest-attenuation area; and average ROI, the mean of the three ROIs on the nodule's superior, middle, and inferior thirds using the approach for the standard ROI. ROIs were then placed in identical locations on unenhanced and delayed phase images. Absolute washout was determined for all methods. RESULTS. The nodules comprised 82 adenomas and 82 nonadenomas (36 pheochromocytomas, 20 metastases, 12 adrenocortical carcinomas, and 14 nodules with other pathologies). The mean nodule size was 4.5 ± 2.8 (SD) cm (range, 1.6-23.0 cm). Unenhanced CT attenuation of 10 HU or less exhibited sensitivity and specificity for adenoma of 22.0% and 96.3% for standard-ROI, 11.0% and 98.8% for high-ROI, 58.5% and 84.1% for low-ROI, and 30.5% and 97.6% for average-ROI methods. Adrenal-protocol CT overall (unenhanced attenuation ≤ 10 HU or absolute washout of ≥ 60%) exhibited sensitivity and specificity for adenoma of 57.3% and 84.1% for the standard-ROI method, 63.4% and 51.2% for the high-ROI method, 68.3% and 62.2% for the low-ROI method, and 59.8% and 85.4% for the average-ROI method. CONCLUSION. Adrenal-protocol CT has poor diagnostic performance for distinguishing adenomas from nonadenomas among heterogeneous adrenal nodules regardless of the method used for ROI placement. CLINICAL IMPACT. Adrenal-protocol CT has limited utility in the evaluation of heterogeneous adrenal nodules.

Adrenal Neoplasms: Lessons from Adrenal Multidisciplinary Tumor Boards.

The radiologic diagnosis of adrenal disease can be challenging in settings of atypical presentations, mimics of benign and malignant adrenal masses, and rare adrenal anomalies. Misdiagnosis may lead to suboptimal management and adverse outcomes. Adrenal adenoma is the most common benign adrenal tumor that arises from the cortex, whereas adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is a rare malignant tumor of the cortex. Adrenal cyst and myelolipoma are other benign adrenal lesions and are characterized by their fluid and fat content, respectively. Pheochromocytoma is a rare neuroendocrine tumor of the adrenal medulla. Metastases to the adrenal glands are the most common malignant adrenal tumors. While many of these masses have classic imaging appearances, considerable overlap exists between benign and malignant lesions and can pose a diagnostic challenge. Atypical adrenal adenomas include those that are lipid poor; contain macroscopic fat, hemorrhage, and/or iron; are heterogeneous and/or large; and demonstrate growth. Heterogeneous adrenal adenomas may mimic ACC, metastasis, or pheochromocytoma, particularly when they are 4 cm or larger, whereas smaller versions of ACC, metastasis, and pheochromocytoma and those with washout greater than 60% may mimic adenoma. Because of its nonenhanced CT attenuation of less than or equal to 10 HU, a lipid-rich adrenal adenoma may be mimicked by a benign adrenal cyst, or it may be mimicked by a tumor with central cystic and/or necrotic change such as ACC, pheochromocytoma, or metastasis. Rare adrenal tumors such as hemangioma, ganglioneuroma, and oncocytoma also may mimic adrenal adenoma, ACC, metastasis, and pheochromocytoma. The authors describe cases of adrenal neoplasms that they have encountered in clinical practice and presented to adrenal multidisciplinary tumor boards. Key lessons to aid in diagnosis and further guide appropriate management are provided. © RSNA, 2023 Online supplemental material is available for this article. Quiz questions for this article are available through the Online Learning Center.

SBRT for HCC: Overview of technique and treatment response assessment.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is an emerging locoregional treatment (LRT) modality used in the management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The decision to treat HCC with LRT is evaluated in a multidisciplinary setting, and the specific LRT chosen depends on the treatment intent, such as bridge-to-transplant, down-staging to transplant, definitive/curative treatment, and/or palliation, as well as underlying patient clinical factors. Accurate assessment of treatment response is necessary in order to guide clinical management in these patients. Patients who undergo LRT need continuous imaging evaluation to assess treatment response and to evaluate for recurrence. Thus, an accurate understanding of expected post-SBRT imaging findings is critical to avoid misinterpreting normal post-treatment changes as local progression or viable tumor. SBRT-treated HCC demonstrates unique imaging findings that differ from HCC treated with other forms of LRT. In particular, SBRT-treated HCC can demonstrate persistent APHE and washout on short-term follow-up imaging. This brief review summarizes current evidence for the use of SBRT for HCC, including patient population, SBRT technique and procedure, tumor response assessment on contrast-enhanced cross-sectional imaging with expected findings, and pitfalls in treatment response evaluation.