Diagnostic performance of gadoxetic acid-enhanced abbreviated magnetic resonance imaging protocol in small hepatocellular carcinoma (≤2 cm) in high-risk patients.

BACKGROUND: Biannual Ultrasound showed insufficient sensitivity in detecting small or early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Abbreviated magnetic resonance imaging (A-MRI) protocols with fewer sequences demonstrated higher HCC detection sensitivity than ultrasound with acceptable cost and examination time. PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic performance of gadoxetic acid-enhanced A-MRI with a full sequence MRI (F-MRI) protocol for small HCC (≤2 cm) in cirrhotic or hepatitis B virus-infected high-risk patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two hundred and four consecutive patients with 166 pathologically confirmed small HCC who underwent preoperative gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI were retrospectively included. A-MRI set comprised T1-weighted hepatobiliary phase imaging, T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient mapping. Two independent radiologists blinded to clinical data assessed the A-MRI set and F-MRI set. Per-patient HCC and per-lesion HCC diagnostic performance were compared. RESULTS: Per-patient HCC detection sensitivity of A-MRI set was 93.8% and 91.2% for observer 1 and observer 2, and, for the F-MRI set, the per-patient HCC detection sensitivity was 96.6% and 95.2%, respectively. There was no significant difference in per-patient sensitivity, specificity and per-lesion HCC detection sensitivity between the two imaging sets for both readers. (P = 0.06-0.25) The A-MRI set showed higher sensitivity on HCC without arterial phase hyperenhancement, and the F-MRI set demonstrated with higher sensitivity on HCC with arterial phase hyperenhancement (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: A-MRI using diagnostic criteria including hypointensity on hepatobiliary phase plus mild to moderate hyperintensity on T2-weighted imaging or restricted diffusion demonstrated comparable sensitivity and specificity for small HCC compared to the F-MRI protocol in high-risk patients.

Diagnostic Performance of Contrast Enhanced CT Alone or in Combination with (Non-)Enhanced MRI for Colorectal Liver Metastasis.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic performance of contrast enhanced CT (CE-CT), CE-CT combined with non-enhanced MRI (NE-MRI) or contrast enhanced MRI (CE-MRI) for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-six colorectal cancer patients with 198 focal liver lesions who underwent preoperative abdominal CE-CT and MRI examinations were included respectively. The images were assessed independently by two readers in three protocols (1: CE-CT, 2: CE-CT+NE-MRI, 3: CE-CT+CE-MRI). The diagnostic performance of each protocol was analyzed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and the areas under ROC (AUCs) were calculated and compared. RESULTS: The detection rates of protocol 2 were 90.9%-92.9% for liver lesions and 86.4%-89.6% for CRLM, and both significantly higher than protocol 1 of 82.8%-85.4% and 76.8%-80.8% (p<0.001-0.001), whereas similar to protocol 3 of 91.9%-94.4% and 87.2%-91.2% (p 0.250-1.000). The AUCs of protocol 2 were greater than protocol 1 for all lesions (0.914-0.934 vs. 0.779-0.799, p<0.001) and lesions < 10mm (0.726-0.776 vs. 0.528-0.561, p<0.001), and were not inferior to that of protocol 3 (0.929-0.949 in all lesions and 0.754-0.821 in lesion < 10mm, p 0.053-0.162). CONCLUSION: CE-CT combined with NE-MRI offered superior diagnostic performance for CRLM compared to CE-CT alone and showed comparable performance to CE-CT combined with CE-MRI.