Chemoembolization versus radiofrequency ablation for single small (≤ 3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for patients with single small (≤ 3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and preserved liver function (Child-Pugh class A). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The clinical features of treatment-naïve patients who underwent TACE and RFA as first-line treatment were balanced through propensity score matching (PSM). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints were local tumor recurrence (LTR) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). RESULTS: The analysis included 440 patients who received TACE, and 430 patients who received RFA. After PSM adjustment (323 pairs), the 5- and 10-year OS rates were 81% and 61%, respectively, in patients who underwent RFA, and 77% and 51%, respectively, for patients who underwent TACE (p = 0.021). Subgroup analyses showed that OS, LTR, and RFS were homogeneously better in the RFA group. CONCLUSION: RFA was associated with better survival outcomes than TACE in patients with single small HCC and preserved liver function. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This large-scale comparative study provides evidence that radiofrequency ablation has a better overall survival rate than chemoembolization for small (≤ 3 cm) hepatocellular carcinomas. KEY POINTS: • The relative effectiveness of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for early HCC is unclear. • Overall survival rate was significantly higher in the RFA group. • The effects of RFA on overall survival, local tumor recurrence, and recurrence-free survival were homogeneously better in all subgroups.

LI-RADS threshold growth based on tumor growth rate can improve the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma ≤ 3.0 cm.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the revision of threshold growth (TG) in the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018, the appropriate time period between the two examinations for TG has not been determined. We compared the accuracy of LI-RADS with TG based on tumor growth rate for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with that of LI-RADS v2018 based on the original TG. METHODS: Patients who underwent preoperative MRI for focal solid lesions (≤ 3.0 cm) were retrospectively evaluated. Three readers measured the size of each lesion on prior CT/MRI and index MRI, with tumor growth rate defined as the percent change in lesion size per month. In addition to the original TG (≥ 50% size increase within ≤ 6 months), the modified TG based on tumor growth rates ≥ 10%/month (TG-10%), ≥ 20%/month (TG-20%), and ≥ 30%/month (TG-30%) were evaluated. The accuracies of these evaluation methods for LI-RADS category 5 HCC were compared using generalized estimation equations. RESULTS: A total of 508 lesions from 370 patients were evaluated. Compared with LI-RADS v2018 with the original TG, the accuracy of LI-RADS with TG-10% was significantly higher (85.0% vs. 80.7%, p < .001), whereas the accuracies of LI-RADS with TG-20% (81.3% vs. 80.7%, p = .404) and TG-30% (79.3% vs. 80.7%, p = .052) were not significant. The sensitivity of LI-RADS with TG-10% was higher than that of LI-RADS v2018 (79.0% vs. 72.5%, p < .001), whereas their specificities were not significantly different (96.6% vs. 96.6%, p > .999). CONCLUSION: TG-10% improved the sensitivity of LI-RADS by detecting additional hepatocellular carcinomas underestimated due to short-term follow-up. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Threshold growth based on tumor growth rate can be clinically useful in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma, by improving the sensitivity of LI-RADS. KEY POINTS: • The diagnostic accuracy of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018 was not significantly affected by the time interval between prior and index assessments of threshold growth. • In the 334 hepatocellular carcinomas, the frequency of threshold growth was significantly higher using tumor growth rate ≥ 10%/month (TG-10%) than original threshold growth (53.3% vs. 18.0%, p < .001). • Compared with LI-RADS v2018 with the original threshold growth, LI-RADS with TG-10% had significantly higher accuracy (85.0% vs. 80.7%, p < .001) and sensitivity (79.0% vs. 72.5%, p < .001) but a similar specificity (96.6% vs. 96.6%, p > .999).

Suboptimal performance of LI-RADS v2018 on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma in liver transplant candidates.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic performance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) detection of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018 on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI, comparing liver transplant candidates (LT group) with patients who underwent surgical resection (SR group), and to determine significant clinical factors for diagnostic performance of LI-RADS v2018. METHODS: Patients who underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI and subsequent SR or LT for HCC were retrospectively included between January 2019 and December 2020. The sensitivity and specificity of LI-RADS LR-5 for HCC were compared between the two groups using generalized estimating equations. The accuracy of patient allocation according to the Milan criteria was calculated for the LT group. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine significant clinical factors associated with the sensitivity of LI-RADS. RESULTS: Of the 281 patients, 237 were assigned to the SR group, and 44 were assigned to the LT group. The LT group showed significantly lower per-patient (48.5% vs. 79.6%, p < .001) and per-lesion sensitivity (31.0% vs. 75.9%, p < .001) than the SR group, whereas no significant difference in both per-patient (100.0% vs. 91.7%, p > .99) and per-lesion specificities (100.0% vs. 94.1%, p > .99). The accuracy of patient allocation was 50.0%. Sensitivity was significantly lower in patients with a smaller lesion size (p < .001), a larger lesion number (p = .002), and a higher Child-Pugh score (p = .009). CONCLUSION: LI-RADS v2018 on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI might be insufficient in liver transplant candidates and other diagnostic imaging tests should be considered in patients with these significant clinical factors. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: In liver transplant candidates with a smaller lesion size, a larger lesion number, and a higher Child-Pugh score, imaging tests other than gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI may be clinically useful to determine the transplant eligibility. KEY POINTS: • The sensitivity of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) was lower in liver transplant candidates than in those who underwent surgical resection. • With the use of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI, the accuracy of patient allocation for liver transplantation on the basis of the Milan criteria was suboptimal. • The sensitivity of LI-RADS v2018 was significantly associated with lesion size, lesion number, and Child-Pugh classification.

Radiofrequency ablation of subcapsular versus nonsubcapsular hepatocellular carcinomas ≤ 3 cm: analysis of long-term outcomes from two large-volume liver centers.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the safety and efficacy of RFA for single HCCs ≤ 3 cm in subcapsular versus nonsubcapsular locations using a propensity score matched analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with solitary HCCs ≤ 3 cm in size who underwent percutaneous RFA from 2005 to 2015 as initial treatment at two large-volume liver centers. Patients were divided into two groups, consisting of those with subcapsular and nonsubcapsular tumor locations. Complications, local tumor progression (LTP), and overall survival (OS) were compared in these two groups before and after propensity score matching (PSM). RESULTS: The study population consisted of 964 patients (712 men [74%]) of mean age 58.3 years. Of these 964 patients, 561 (58%) had nonsubcapsular and 403 (42%) had subcapsular HCCs. PSM generated 402 pairs of patients. Major complication rate was low, but significantly higher in the subcapscular group (p = 0.047). Rates of technical effectiveness in these two groups were 99% and 98%, respectively (p = 0.315). However, during follow-up, cumulative 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year LTP and OS rates did significantly differ in both entire and PSM cohorts, resulting in the latter 8%, 15%, 20%, and 26% in the nonsubcapsular group vs. 13%, 24%, 30%, and 31% in the subcapsular group (p = 0.015), and 99%, 91%, 80%, and 59% vs. 98%, 85%, 73%, and 50% in the two groups (p = 0.004), respectively. CONCLUSION: Rates of major complications, LTP, and OS differed significantly following first-line RFA treatment of single HCCs ≤ 3 cm in favor of the nonsubcapsular locations. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This large-scale study provides evidence that radiofrequency ablation for small (≤ 3 cm) hepatocellular carcinomas is safer and more effective in nonsubcapsular location than in subcapsular location. KEY POINTS: • There exist conflicting outcomes on the effectiveness of RFA for early HCC depending on tumor location. • Rate of local tumor progression was significantly higher in the subcapsular hepatocellular carcinomas. • Overall survival rate was significantly poorer in the subcapsular hepatocellular carcinomas.

Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2018 for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma in alcoholic liver cirrhosis and virus-related cirrhosis.

PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018 for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ≤ 3.0 cm on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI according to the etiology of cirrhosis. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients with alcoholic liver cirrhosis (ALC) and 37 with hepatitis C virus-related cirrhosis (HCV) who underwent preoperative MRI and subsequent surgical resection or transplantation were included. For comparison groups, patients with hepatitis B virus-related cirrhosis (HBV) were included by 1:1 matching with HCV and ALC groups according to age, lesion size, and Child-Pugh classification. The imaging characteristics of background liver and focal lesions were analyzed. The diagnostic performance of LI-RADS was compared between HCV and HBV groups, and between ALC and HBV groups. RESULTS: ALC group showed significantly higher frequency of hepatic steatosis (25.8 % vs. 6.1 %, p =.04) and lower frequency of nonperipheral washout on portal venous-phase in HCC (63.2 % vs. 97.1 %, p <.001) compared with HBV group. ALC group showed significantly lower sensitivity than HBV group (52.6 % vs. 88.6 %, p<.001). No significant differences in diagnostic performance were found between HCV and HBV groups. In ALC group, hepatobiliary-phase hypointensity provided significantly higher sensitivity (76.3 % vs. 52.6 %, p =.008). CONCLUSION: The sensitivity of LI-RADS for diagnosing HCC ≤ 3.0 cm was significantly lower in the ALC group than in the HBV group.

CT Rule-in and Rule-out Criteria for Clinically Significant Portal Hypertension in Chronic Liver Disease.

Background The value of CT in assessment of clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) has not been well determined. Purpose To evaluate the performance of CT features that have been associated with portal hypertension for diagnosing CSPH in patients with chronic liver disease (CLD). Materials and Methods This retrospective study included patients with CLD who underwent contrast-enhanced CT and subsequent hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement within 3 months at two tertiary institutions from January 2001 to December 2019. Two readers independently evaluated the presence of gastroesophageal varix, spontaneous portosystemic shunt (SPSS), and ascites on CT images. Splenomegaly at CT was determined using three methods, as follows: personalized or fixed volume criteria, based on spleen volume as measured by a deep learning algorithm, or manually measured spleen diameter. The diagnostic performance of these findings alone or in combination for detecting CSPH (HVPG ≥10 mm Hg) was evaluated. Results A total of 235 patients (mean age, 53.2 years ± 13.0 [SD]; 155 male patients), including 110 (46.8%) with CSPH, were included. Detection of CSPH according to the presence of both splenomegaly and at least one other CT feature (ie, gastroesophageal varix, SPSS, and ascites) achieved specificities of 94.4%-97.6%, whereas detection of CSPH according to the presence of any feature (ie, splenomegaly, gastroesophageal varix, SPSS, or ascites) achieved sensitivities of 94.5%-98.2%. When employing the former as rule-in criteria with the absence of splenomegaly, gastroesophageal varix, SPSS, and ascites as rule-out criteria for CSPH, 171-185 (range, 72.8%-78.7%) of 235 patients were correctly classified as either having CSPH or not, seven to 13 (range, 3%-5.5%) of 235 patients were incorrectly classified, and 42-54 (range, 17.9%-23%) of 235 patients were unclassified. Conclusion The presence or absence of splenomegaly, gastroesophageal varix, SPSS, and/or ascites on CT images may be useful for ruling in and ruling out CSPH in patients with CLD. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Fraum in this issue.

LI-RADS version 2018 for hepatocellular carcinoma < 1.0 cm on gadoxetate disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to develop and evaluate a modified Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018 using significant ancillary features for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) < 1.0 cm on gadoxetate disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: Patients who underwent preoperative gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI for focal solid nodules < 2.0 cm within 1 month of MRI between January 2016 and December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Major and ancillary features were compared between HCCs of < 1.0 cm and 1.0-1.9 cm using the chi-square test. Significant ancillary features associated with HCC < 1.0 cm were determined by univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis. The sensitivity and specificity of LR-5 were compared between LI-RADS v2018 and our modified LI-RADS (applying the significant ancillary feature) using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Of 796 included nodules, 248 were < 1.0 cm and 548 were 1.0-1.9 cm. HCC < 1.0 cm less frequently showed an enhancing capsule (7.1% vs. 31.1%, p < .001) and threshold growth (0% vs. 8.3%, p = .007) than HCC of 1.0-1.9 cm. Restricted diffusion was the only ancillary feature significant for diagnosing HCC < 1.0 cm (adjusted odds ratio = 11.50, p < .001). In the diagnosis of HCC, our modified LI-RADS using restricted diffusion had significantly higher sensitivity than LI-RADS v2018 (61.8% vs. 53.5%, p < .001), with similar specificity (97.3% vs. 97.8%, p = .157). CONCLUSION: Restricted diffusion was the only significant independent ancillary feature for diagnosing HCC < 1.0 cm. Our modified LI-RADS using restricted diffusion can improve the sensitivity for HCC < 1.0 cm. KEY POINTS: • The imaging features of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) < 1.0 cm differed from those of HCC of 1.0-1.9 cm. • Restricted diffusion was the only significant independent ancillary feature for HCC < 1.0 cm. • Modified Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) with the addition of restricted diffusion can improve the sensitivity for HCC < 1.0 cm.

Value of threshold growth as a major diagnostic feature of hepatocellular carcinoma in LI-RADS.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The Liver Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018 simplified the definition of threshold growth to '≥50% size increase in a mass in ≤6 months'. However, the diagnostic value of threshold growth for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remained unclear. We evaluated the value of threshold growth, as defined by LI-RADS v2018, in diagnosing HCCs. METHODS: Patients who underwent preoperative gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI because of the presence of LI-RADS category 2, 3, or 4 rather than category 5 on prior CT/MRI between January 2017 and December 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. Pathologic or clinical diagnoses were used as reference standards. Imaging features were evaluated by three readers according to LI-RADS v2018. The frequency and diagnostic odds ratio of threshold growth were calculated. The diagnostic performance of LI-RADS category 5 was separately evaluated when threshold growth was and was not considered a major feature, and results were compared using generalized estimation equations. Subgroups of patients who underwent CT/MRI during the previous 3-6 months were analyzed. RESULTS: Analysis of 340 observations in 243 patients found that the frequency of threshold growth was 18.8% and it gradually increased over time. Threshold growth was significantly associated with HCC (diagnostic odds ratio 5.2; 95% CI 2.1-12.7; p <0.001). Use of threshold growth as a major feature significantly increased sensitivity in both the overall (66.4% vs. 57.3%, p <0.001) and subgroup (73.4% vs. 58.2%, p <0.001) cohorts, but had no effect on specificity in either the overall (97.5% vs. 98.3%, p = 0.319) or subgroup (95.9% vs. 98.0%, p = 0.323) cohorts. CONCLUSION: The revised threshold growth of LI-RADS v2018 was significantly associated with HCC. Use of threshold growth as a major diagnostic feature of HCC can improve the sensitivity of LI-RADS v2018. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: We found that the revised threshold growth in the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2018 (LI-RADS v2018) was a significant predictor of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The use of threshold growth as a major imaging feature of HCC significantly increased the sensitivity of LI-RADS v2018, especially small HCCs (≤3.0 cm), compared with its non-use. Because these small HCCs are eligible for curative treatments, the additional detection of small HCCs is clinically meaningful.

Simplified LI-RADS for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Diagnosis at Gadoxetic Acid-enhanced MRI.

Background Although various modifications to the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) at gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI have been suggested, LI-RADS shows suboptimal sensitivity for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and is perceived to be too complex. Purpose To evaluate clinical usefulness of a simplified LI-RADS for diagnosing HCCs of 30 mm or smaller at gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. Materials and Methods Patients who underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI examination and subsequent resection, transplantation, or biopsy for focal solid nodules of 30 mm or smaller between January 2019 and December 2020 at a single tertiary referral institution were retrospectively analyzed. Two strategies for simplified LI-RADS using one size criterion (≥10 mm) were evaluated (strategy A, using classifications for nodules of 10-19 mm for nodules both 10-19 mm and ≥20 mm; strategy B, using classifications for nodules ≥20 mm for nodules both 10-19 mm and ≥20 mm). Multivariable analysis was performed to determine significant ancillary features for HCC. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare diagnostic performance for LR-5 (definite HCC) between LI-RADS version 2018 and simplified LI-RADS. The time required for LI-RADS category assignment was compared between the two systems with use of a paired t test. Results A total of 645 nodules from 510 patients (mean age ± SD, 60 years ± 10; 393 men) were evaluated. Compared with strategy A, strategy B had a higher sensitivity of 74% (347 of 470 nodules [95% CI: 70, 78]) vs 73% (342 of 470 nodules [95% CI: 69, 77]) (P = .02) with the same specificity of 96% (168 of 175 nodules [95% CI: 92, 98]) vs 96% (168 of 175 nodules [95% CI: 92, 98]) (P > .99). In strategy B, transitional phase hypointensity was an independent ancillary feature for HCC (P = .04) in LR-4 of at least 10 mm with arterial phase hyperenhancement and no other major features. In all 645 nodules, simplified LI-RADS with use of both strategy B and transitional phase hypointensity had a higher sensitivity of 82% (387 of 470 nodules [95% CI: 79, 86]) vs 73% (343 of 470 nodules [95% CI: 69, 77]) (P < .001) than LI-RADS version 2018, without lower specificity (94%, 165 of 175 nodules [95% CI: 90, 97] vs 96%, 168 of 175 nodules [95% CI: 92, 98], P = .08). Compared with LI-RADS version 2018, simplified LI-RADS reduced the time for LI-RADS category assignment (44 seconds ± 23 vs 74 seconds ± 22, P < .001). Conclusion A simplified Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System was found to be clinically useful for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinomas of 30 mm or smaller at gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. © RSNA, 2022 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

New strategy for Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System category M to improve diagnostic performance of MRI for hepatocellular carcinoma ≤ 3.0 cm.

PURPOSE: We aimed to determine a new strategy for Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System category M (LR-M) criteria to improve the diagnosis of HCC ≤ 3.0 cm on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: A total of 463 pathologically confirmed hepatic observations ≤ 3.0 cm (375 HCCs, 32 other malignancies, 56 benignities) in 384 patients at risk of HCC who underwent gadoxetate-enhanced MRI were retrospectively analyzed. Two radiologists evaluated the presence of major, ancillary, and LR-M features according to LI-RADS v2018. Of the ten LR-M features, those significantly associated with non-HCC malignancy were identified using multivariable logistic regression analysis, and new LR-M criteria for improving the diagnosis of HCC were investigated. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare sensitivity and specificity of LR-5 for diagnosing HCC using the new LR-M criteria with values calculated using the original LR-M criteria. p < 0.05 was considered to indicate a significant difference. RESULTS: Of ten LR-M features, rim arterial-phase hyperenhancement, delayed central enhancement, targetoid restriction, and targetoid transitional-phase/hepatobiliary-phase appearance were independently significantly associated with non-HCC malignancy (adjusted odds ratio ≥ 6.2; p ≤ 0.02). Using the new LR-M criteria (two or more of these significant features), the sensitivity of LR-5 for diagnosing HCC was higher than that with the original LR-M criteria (69% [95% confidence interval 64-73%] vs. 65% [61-70%], p = 0.002), whereas the specificity was similar (90% [82-95%] vs. 92% [83-96%], p = 0.28). CONCLUSION: The new LR-M criteria (two or more significant features) can improve the sensitivity of LR-5 for diagnosing HCC ≤ 3.0 cm, without compromising specificity.

Radiofrequency Ablation versus Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the treatment outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) and to determine the favorable treatment modality according to tumor characteristics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the records of 222 colorectal cancer patients with 330 CRLM who underwent RFA (268 tumors in 178 patients) or SBRT (62 tumors in 44 patients) between 2007 and 2014. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox models were used by adjusting with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). RESULTS: The median follow-up duration was 30.5 months. The median tumor size was significantly smaller in the RFA group than in the SBRT group (1.5 cm vs 2.3 cm, p<0.001). In IPTW-adjusted analysis, difference in treatment modality was not associated with significant differences in 1-year and 3-year recurrence-free survival (35% vs 43%, 22% vs 23%; p=0.198), overall survival (96% vs 91%, 58% vs 56%; p=0.508), and freedom from local progression (FFLP; 90% vs 72%, 78% vs 60%; p=0.106). Significant interaction effect between the treatment modality and tumor size was observed for FFLP (p=0.001). In IPTW-adjusted subgroup analysis of patients with tumor size >2 cm, the SBRT group had a higher FFLP compared with the RFA group (HR, 0.153; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: SBRT and RFA showed similar local control in the treatment of patients with CRLM. Tumor size was an independent prognostic factor for local control and SBRT may be preferred for larger tumors.

Thermal ablation in the treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the efficacy and safety of thermal ablation for the treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochran Library, and Web of Science databases were searched for studies reporting outcomes in patients with ICC treated with thermal ablation. Meta-analyses of cumulative overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS), Kaplan-Meier survival rates according to time to local tumor progression (TTLTP), technical efficacy, and incidence of complications were analyzed. Pooled hazard ratios of common variables were calculated to explore factors associated with OS. RESULTS: Twenty observational studies comprising 917 patients were reviewed (primary ICC [n = 502]; post-surgical recurrent ICC [n = 355]; information not available [n = 60]). The pooled proportion of technical efficacy was 91.9% (95% CI, 87.3-94.9%). The pooled 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 82.4% (95% CI, 75.1-88.9%), 42.1% (95% CI, 36.0-48.4%), and 28.5% (95% CI, 21.2-36.2%). Primary tumors showed higher 3-year OS rates than recurrent ones, with borderline significance (p = 0.072). The pooled 1- and 3-year RFS rates were 40.0% (95% CI, 33.6-46.4%) and 19.2% (95% CI, 8.4-32.7%). The pooled 1-, 3-, and 5-year TTLTP rates were 79.3% (95% CI, 65.1-90.9%), 59.5% (95% CI, 49.1-69.4%), and 58.2% (95% CI, 44.9-70.9%). The pooled incidence of major complications was 5.7% (95% CI, 4.1-7.8%). Tumor size (> 3 cm), multiple tumors, and age (> 65 years) were factors associated with shorter OS. CONCLUSION: Thermal ablation is a successful alternative with a good safety profile, especially for a single ICC smaller than 3 cm. KEY POINTS: • The pooled 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates following thermal ablation for the treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma were 82.4%, 42.1%, and 28.5%. • The pooled incidence of major complications was 5.7%. • A tumor size > 3 cm (HR: 2.12, p = 0.006), multiple tumors (HR: 1.67, p = 0.004), and age > 65 years (HR: 1.67, p = 0.006) were factors associated with shorter OS.

Percutaneous Radiofrequency Ablation for Recurrent Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma After Curative Resection: Multivariable Analysis of Factors Predicting Survival Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the factors associated with local tumor progression (LTP) and overall survival (OS) in patients who have undergone percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for recurrent intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) after curative resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Data from 40 patients (mean age, 56.3 years) with 64 recurrent iCCAs (median diameter, 1.5 cm) who underwent percutaneous RFA between 1999 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were included if they had three or fewer metastases, a maximum tumor diameter of 5 cm or less, and disease confined to the liver. RESULTS. Technical success was achieved in all patients, with no procedure-related mortality. During follow-up, local progression of treated lesions was observed in 31.3% of tumors. The median OS and 5-year survival rate from initial RFA were 26.6 months and 18.3%, respectively. Multivariable analysis showed that a larger tumor diameter (> 2 cm, p = .004) was significantly associated with reduced LTP-free survival and that both a larger tumor diameter and less than 1 year from surgery to recurrence (p = .005 and .006, respectively) were statistically significant predictors of reduced OS after RFA. CONCLUSION. Percutaneous RFA may offer a well-tolerated and successful approach to local tumor control in patients with recurrent iCCA after curative surgery. Patients with a small-diameter tumor (≤ 2 cm) and late hepatic recurrence (≥ 1 year after curative resection) benefited most from RFA treatment.

Combined computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging improves diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma ≤ 3.0 cm.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Imaging diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is important, but the diagnostic performance of combined computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018 is not fully understood. We evaluated the clinical usefulness of combined CT and MRI for diagnosing HCC ≤ 3.0 cm using LI-RADS. METHODS: In 222 patients at risk of HCC who underwent both contrast-enhanced dynamic CT and gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI in 2017, 291 hepatic nodules ≤ 3.0 cm were retrospectively analyzed. Two radiologists performed image analysis and assigned a LI-RADS category to each nodule. The diagnostic performance for HCC was evaluated for CT, ordinary-MRI (washout confined to portal venous-phase), and modified-MRI (washout extended to hepatobiliary phase), and sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each modality. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare the diagnostic performance for HCC between combined CT and ordinary-MRI, combined CT and modified-MRI, and CT or MRI alone. p < 0.0062 (0.05/8) was considered statistically significant following Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: In 291 nodules, the sensitivity and specificity of CT, ordinary-MRI, and modified-MRI were 70.2% and 92.8%, 72.6% and 96.4%, and 84.6% and 88.0%, respectively. Compared with CT or MRI alone, both combined CT and ordinary-MRI (sensitivity, 83.7%; specificity, 95.2%) and combined CT and modified-MRI (sensitivity, 88.9%; specificity, 89.2%) showed significantly higher sensitivity (p ≤ 0.006), without a significant decrease in specificity (p ≥ 0.314). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with CT or MRI alone, combined CT and MRI can increase sensitivity for diagnosing HCC ≤ 3.0 cm, without a significant decrease in specificity.

Value of discrepancy of the central scar-like structure between dynamic CT and gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI in differentiation of focal nodular hyperplasia and hepatocellular adenoma.

PURPOSE: To identify the value of discrepancies in the central scar (CS)-like structure between dynamic CT and gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI for differentiating FNH from HCA. METHODS: This retrospective study included 113 patients with pathologically-diagnosed FNH (n = 80) or HCA (n = 37). CS-like structures were evaluated on arterial phase (AP) CT and hepatobiliary phase (HBP) MRI. Presence of the CS-like structure, its discrepancy in visibility or size between AP CT and HBP MRI and between AP and HBP MRI, and features of non-scarred tumor portion were evaluated by two radiologists. Inter-observer agreement was evaluated by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and weighted kappa. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression and ROC analysis were performed to explore features differentiating FNH from HCA. RESULTS: Inter-observer agreement was moderate-to-excellent (ICCs≥0.74, kappa≥0.65). On univariable analysis, presence of CS-like structures (P < 0.001), discrepancy of the CS-like structures between AP CT and HBP MRI (73.8 % in FNH; 16.2 % in HCA, P < 0.001) and between AP and HBP MRI (70.0 % in FNH; 16.2 % in HCA, P < 0.001), and the features of non-scarred tumor portion (P ≤ 0.011) were significantly different between FNH and HCA. On multivariable analysis, the discrepancy of CS-like structures between AP CT and HBP MRI, and the absence of low SI of the non-scarred tumor portion on HBP MRI, were suggestive of FNH (P = 0.036 and P < 0.001, respectively; area under the ROC curve, 0.96 [95 % CI, 0.93-0.99]). CONCLUSION: Evaluation of discrepancy in the visibility or size of CS-like structures between dynamic CT and gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI may facilitate the differentiation of FNH from HCA.

Radiofrequency ablation versus stereotactic body radiation therapy for small (≤ 3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma: A retrospective comparison analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We compared the clinical outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in small (≤ 3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: A total of 266 patients treated with RFA (n = 179) or SBRT (n = 87) were reviewed. Local control rates (LCRs), intrahepatic recurrence-free survival (IHRFS) rates, and overall survival (OS) rates were compared. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for imbalances in baseline characteristics between the two groups. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 50.3 months, and treatment method (RFA vs SBRT) was not a significant prognostic factor for LCR, OS, and IHRFS in both multivariate and IPTW-adjusted analyses. The 4-year LCRs after RFA and SBRT were 92.7% and 95.0%, respectively. Perivascular location was a significant prognostic factor for LCR in the entire patients and in the RFA group, but not in the SBRT group. The 4-year OS rates in the RFA and SBRT groups were 78.1% and 64.1%, respectively (P = 0.012). After IPTW adjustment, the 4-year LCRs (90.6% vs 96.3%) and OS rates (71.8% vs 70.2%) were not significantly different between the two groups. The rate of grade ≥ 3 adverse events was 0.6% (n = 1) in the RFA group and 1.1% (n = 1) in the SBRT group. CONCLUSIONS: The two treatment methods showed comparable outcomes in terms of LCR, OS rate, and IHRFS rate after IPTW adjustment. SBRT seems to be a viable alternative method for small hepatocellular carcinomas that are not suitable for RFA due to tumor location.

Diagnostic performance of ultrasonography-guided core-needle biopsy according to MRI LI-RADS diagnostic categories.

PURPOSE: According to the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) guidelines, biopsy is a diagnostic option for focal hepatic lesions depending on the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) category. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of ultrasonography-guided core-needle biopsy (CNB) according to LI-RADS categories. METHODS: A total of 145 High-risk patients for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) followed by CNB for a focal hepatic lesion preoperatively were retrospectively enrolled. Focal hepatic lesions on MRI were evaluated according to LI-RADS version 2018. Pathologic results were categorized into HCC, non-HCC malignancies, and benignity. The categorization was defined as correct when the CNB pathology and surgical pathology reports were identical. Nondiagnostic results were defined as inadequate CNB pathology findings for a specific diagnosis. The proportion of correct categorizations was calculated for each LI-RADS category, excluding nondiagnostic results. RESULTS: After excluding 16 nondiagnostic results, 131 lesions were analyzed (45 LR-5, 24 LR-4, 4 LR-3, and 58 LR-M). All LR-5 lesions were HCC, and CNB correctly categorized 97.8% (44/45) of LR-5 lesions. CNB correctly categorized all 24 LR-4 lesions, 16.7% (4/24) of which were non-HCC malignancies. All LR-M lesions were malignant, and 62.1% (36/58) were non-HCC malignancies. CNB correctly categorized 93.1% (54/58) of LR-M lesions, and 12.5% (3/24) of lesions with CNB results of HCC were confirmed as non-HCC malignancies. CONCLUSION: In agreement with AASLD guidelines, CNB could be helpful for LR-4 lesions, but is unnecessary for LR-5 lesions. In LR-M lesions, CNB results of HCC did not exclude non-HCC malignancy.

US LI-RADS visualization score: diagnostic outcome of ultrasound-guided focal hepatic lesion biopsy in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma.

PURPOSE: This study investigated the diagnostic outcome of ultrasound (US)-guided focal hepatic lesion biopsy in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and evaluated the US visualization score as a risk factor for non-diagnostic results. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 208 focal hepatic lesions in 208 patients who underwent US-guided biopsy in 2016. Using the US Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2017, each exam was assigned a US visualization score (A, B, or C). Final diagnoses were made using pathology reports, and biopsy results were categorized as diagnostic or non-diagnostic. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to determine risk factors for non-diagnostic results, including US visualization score and other clinical covariates. RESULTS: Of the 208 lesions, 85.1% were diagnostic and 14.9% were non-diagnostic. The rates of non-diagnostic results were 8.9%, 25.5%, and 57.1% for scores of A, B, and C, respectively. In the univariable analysis, scores of B or C were associated with a significantly higher rate of nondiagnostic results than scores of A (58.1% vs. 24.9%, P<0.001). In the multivariable analysis, US visualization score of B or C (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.7; P=0.027), high-risk needle pathway usage (aOR, 5.7; P=0.001), and lesion size ≤2.0 cm (aOR, 2.7; P=0.024) were independent risk factors for non-diagnostic results. CONCLUSION: US-guided biopsy had a high diagnostic yield for focal hepatic lesions in patients at risk for HCC. US visualization score of B or C, lesion size ≤2.0 cm, and high-risk needle pathway usage were independent risk factors for non-diagnostic results.

Accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound liver imaging reporting and data system: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: After the introduction of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (CEUS LI-RADS), several studies have reported on its performance, but the reported data vary considerably. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the diagnostic performance of CEUS LI-RADS in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and investigate the causes of study heterogeneity. METHODS: Original studies published until May 30, 2020, investigating the diagnostic performance of CEUS LI-RADS were identified in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases. Study quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Meta-analytic summary sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of HCC were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model. Meta-regression analysis was performed to explore the causes of study heterogeneity. RESULTS: Of the 105 articles screened, eight studies were finally analyzed (5428 hepatic observations). The summary sensitivity and specificity of CEUS LI-RADS category 5 (LR-5) for diagnosing HCC were 73% [95% confidence interval (CI) 65-79%; I2 = 93%] and 95% (95% CI 91-97%; I2 = 89%), respectively. Substantial study heterogeneity was noted in both sensitivity and specificity. Study heterogeneity was significantly associated with the proportion of cases of HCC and the type of reference standard (p ≤ 0.05). CONCLUSION: CEUS LI-RADS had high pooled specificity for diagnosing HCC but suboptimal pooled sensitivity. Substantial study heterogeneity was found, which was significantly associated with the proportion of cases of HCC and the type of reference standard.

Comparison of the diagnostic performance of imaging criteria for HCCs ≤ 3.0 cm on gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Imaging-based diagnostic systems play important roles in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of recently updated imaging criteria for HCCs ≤ 3.0 cm on gadoxetate disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: 493 nodules (399 HCCs, 24 other malignancies, 70 benign) 1.0-3.0 cm from 400 patients, including 322 male (mean age 59.3 ± 9.4 years) and 78 female (mean age 61.2 ± 9.0 years), at risk for HCC who underwent gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI between July 2015 and December 2016 were retrospectively evaluated. Final diagnosis was determined histopathologically or clinically. The sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing HCC of the latest versions of four imaging criteria [Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS), European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL), Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL), Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center (KLCA-NCC)] were compared using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: In 331 only pathologically diagnosed nodules, the sensitivities of both the APASL (86.8%) and KLCA-NCC criteria (85.4%) were significantly higher than the sensitivities of the EASL (71.8%) and LR-5 (71.1%) criteria (p < 0.001 for each pairwise comparison). However, the specificity of LR-5 was significantly higher than that of APASL (92.2% vs. 70.6%, respectively; p = 0.011) but did not differ significantly from the specificities of EASL (84.3%; p = 0.634) and KLCA-NCC (78.4%; p = 0.107). CONCLUSION: Of the four international imaging criteria, LI-RADS and EASL showed high specificity but suboptimal sensitivity for diagnosing HCCs ≤ 3 cm. However, APASL and KLCA-NCC had a higher sensitivity but a lower specificity than LI-RADS and EASL.