Can Modifications of LR-M Criteria Improve the Diagnostic Performance of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound LI-RADS for Small Hepatic Lesions up to 3 cm?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic performance of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound liver imaging reporting and data system (CEUS LI-RADS) version 2017 for small hepatic lesions of ≤3 cm before and after changing the LR-M criteria. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the CEUS examination of 179 patients who were at high risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with focal hepatic lesions ≤3 cm (194 lesions in total) and evaluated the diagnostic capability of the American College of Radiology and modified CEUS LI-RADS algorithms. RESULTS: Revision of the early washout time to 45 seconds increased the sensitivity of LR-5 in predicting HCC (P = .004), with no significant decrease in specificity (P = .118). It also made better the specificity of LR-M in predicting non-HCC malignancies (P = .001), with no significant decrease in sensitivity (P = .094). However, using within 3 minutes as the criterion for marked washout time improved the LR-5 sensitivity (P < .001) but decreased its specificity (P = .009) in predicting HCC, whereas the specificity of LR-M in predicting non-HCC malignancies increased (P < .001), but the sensitivity decreased (P = .027). CONCLUSIONS: CEUS LI-RADS (v2017) is a valid method for predicting HCC risk in high-risk patients. The diagnostic performance of LR-5 and LR-M could boost when the early washout time is revised to 45 seconds.

Intra-individual comparison of Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasound and SonoVue contrast-enhanced ultrasound in diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To assess whether the diagnostic performance of Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasound (SZUS) is non-inferior to that of SonoVue contrast-enhanced ultrasound (SVUS) in diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in individuals with high risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was conducted from October 2020 to May 2022 and included participants with a high risk of HCC who underwent SZUS and SVUS. All lesions were confirmed by clinical or pathological diagnosis. Each nodule was classified according to the Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2017 (CEUS LI-RADS v2017) for SVUS and SZUS and the modified CEUS LI-RADS (using Kupffer phase defect instead of late and mild washout) for SZUS. The diagnostic performance of both two modalities for all observations was compared. Analysis of the vascular phase and Kupffer phase imaging characteristics of CEUS was performed. RESULTS: One hundred and fifteen focal liver lesions from 113 patients (94 HCCs, 12 non-HCC malignancies, and 9 benign lesions) were analysed. According to CEUS LI-RADS (v2017), SVUS and SZUS showed similar sensitivity (71.3% vs. 72.3%) and specificity (85.7% vs. 81.0%) in HCC diagnosis. However, the modified CEUS LI-RADS did not significantly improve the diagnostic efficacy of Sonazoid compared to CEUS LI-RADS v2017, having equivalent sensitivity (73.4% vs. 72.3%) and specificity (81.0% vs. 81.0%). The agreement between SVUS and SZUS for all observations was 0.610 (95% CI 0.475, 0.745), while for HCCs it was 0.452 (95% CI 0.257, 0.647). CONCLUSION: Using LI-RADS v2017, SZUS and SVUS showed non-inferior efficacy in evaluating HCC lesions. In addition, adding Kupffer phase defects to SZUS does not notably improve its diagnostic efficacy.

Diagnostic value of CEUS LI-RADS and serum tumor markers for combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: To analyze the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) manifestations of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (CHC) and to investigate the diagnostic value of the 2017 version of the CEUS Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) and serum tumor markers in CHC. METHODS: A total of 66 pathologically confirmed CHC nodules were retrospectively analyzed. We summarized the CEUS manifestations of CHC and analyzed the relationship between serum tumor markers and the enhancement pattern of CHC. We also classified CHC according to CEUS LI-RADS criteria. The Kappa test was used to assess the interreader agreement of CEUS LI-RADS between radiologists. RESULT: According to the results, 52 of 62 (83.9%) patients had elevated alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), 19 of 61 (31.1%) had elevated carbohydrate antigen 199 (CA 199), and 13 of 61 (21.3%) had both elevated AFP and CA 199. Of the 66 CHC nodules, 64 (97.0%) were identified as malignant lesions by CEUS, 13 (19.7%) showed a hepatocellular carcinoma-like enhancement pattern, and 21 (31.8%) showed a cholangiocarcinoma-like enhancement pattern. For the CEUS LI-RADS categories, 39 of 53 (73.6%) CHC nodules were classified as LR-M, 12 (22.6%) were classified as LR-5, and 2 (3.8%) were classified as LR-4. The interreader agreement for the LI-RADS categories was 0.60. CONCLUSIONS: Although CHC lacks specific CEUS features, CEUS LI-RADS and serum tumor markers can be useful tools for reducing the misdiagnosis of CHC. In addition, due to the relative complexity of the CEUS features involved in CHC, it is necessary for beginning radiologists to learn more about CEUS features.