Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Current Status of Imaging to Evaluate Liver Metastases From Colorectal Cancer

  • Colorectal Cancer Hepatic Metastases (MA Choti, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Colorectal Cancer Reports

Abstract

Multiple imaging modalities are routinely used to identify, characterize, and clinically follow colorectal cancer liver metastases. These include ultrasound, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography. Within each modality, there exist multiple variations of protocol, which could include addition of contrast, acquisition of specific imaging sequences, or combination of images with those of another modality. In addition to considerations of imaging protocols and equipment, one must also consider patient-specific factors to determine appropriate imaging for colorectal cancer liver metastases. Specifically, whether the patient has been treated systemically or locally is important in determining imaging strategy. This review highlights the benefits, limitations, and variations of each modality and offers comparative data among the imaging techniques.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(1):5–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Smith JJ, D’Angelica MI. Surgical management of hepatic metastases of colorectal cancer. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2015;29(1):61–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fong Y, Fortner J, Sun RL, Brennan MF, Blumgart LH. Clinical score for predicting recurrence after hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: analysis of 1001 consecutive cases. Ann Surg. 1999;230(3):309–18. discussion 318–321.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Choti MA, Sitzmann JV, Tiburi MF, Sumetchotimetha W, Rangsin R, Schulick RD, et al. Trends in long-term survival following liver resection for hepatic colorectal metastases. Ann Surg. 2002;235(6):759–66.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cardona K, Mastrodomenico P, D’Amico F, Shia J, Gonen M, Weiser MR, et al. Detailed pathologic characteristics of the primary colorectal tumor independently predict outcome after hepatectomy for metastases. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(1):148–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Colucci G, Gebbia V, Paoletti G, Giuliani F, Caruso M, Gebbia N, et al. Phase III randomized trial of FOLFIRI versus FOLFOX4 in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: a multicenter study of the Gruppo Oncologico Dell’Italia Meridionale. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(22):4866–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nordlinger B, Guiguet M, Vaillant JC, Balladur P, Boudjema K, Bachellier P, et al. Surgical resection of colorectal carcinoma metastases to the liver. A prognostic scoring system to improve case selection, based on 1568 patients. Association Francaise de Chirurgie. Cancer. 1996;77(7):1254–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bruneton JN, Raffaelli C, Balu-Maestro C, Padovani B, Chevallier P, Mourou MY. Sonographic diagnosis of solitary solid liver nodules in cancer patients. Eur Radiol. 1996;6(4):439–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wernecke K, Vassallo P, Bick U, Diederich S, Peters PE. The distinction between benign and malignant liver tumors on sonography: value of a hypoechoic halo. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1992;159(5):1005–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kinkel K, Lu Y, Both M, Warren RS, Thoeni RF. Detection of hepatic metastases from cancers of the gastrointestinal tract by using noninvasive imaging methods (US, CT, MR imaging, PET): a meta-analysis. Radiology. 2002;224(3):748–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Larsen LP, Rosenkilde M, Christensen H, Bang N, Bolvig L, Christiansen T, et al. The value of contrast enhanced ultrasonography in detection of liver metastases from colorectal cancer: a prospective double-blinded study. Eur J Radiol. 2007;62(2):302–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wilson SR, Burns PN. Microbubble-enhanced US in body imaging: what role? Radiology. 2010;257(1):24–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bryant TH, Blomley MJ, Albrecht T, Sidhu PS, Leen EL, Basilico R, et al. Improved characterization of liver lesions with liver-phase uptake of liver-specific microbubbles: prospective multicenter study. Radiology. 2004;232(3):799–809.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wilson SR, Burns PN. An algorithm for the diagnosis of focal liver masses using microbubble contrast-enhanced pulse-inversion sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186(5):1401–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Trillaud H, Bruel JM, Valette PJ, Vilgrain V, Schmutz G, Oyen R, et al. Characterization of focal liver lesions with SonoVue-enhanced sonography: international multicenter-study in comparison to CT and MRI. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15(30):3748–56.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Strobel D, Bernatik T, Blank W, Schuler A, Greis C, Dietrich CF, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of CEUS in the differential diagnosis of small (</= 20 mm) and subcentimetric (</= 10 mm) focal liver lesions in comparison with histology. Results of the DEGUM multicenter trial. Ultraschall Med. 2011;32(6):593–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Machi J, Isomoto H, Kurohiji T, Shirouzu K, Yamashita Y, Kakegawa T, et al. Detection of unrecognized liver metastases from colorectal cancers by routine use of operative ultrasonography. Dis Colon Rectum. 1986;29(6):405–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lordan JT, Stenson KM, Karanjia ND. The value of intraoperative ultrasound and preoperative imaging, individually and in combination, in liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2011;93(3):246–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schulz A, Dormagen JB, Drolsum A, Bjornbeth BA, Labori KJ, Klow NE. Impact of contrast-enhanced intraoperative ultrasound on operation strategy in case of colorectal liver metastasis. Acta Radiol. 2012;53(10):1081–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Takahashi M, Hasegawa K, Arita J, Hata S, Aoki T, Sakamoto Y, et al. Contrast-enhanced intraoperative ultrasonography using perfluorobutane microbubbles for the enumeration of colorectal liver metastases. Br J Surg. 2012;99(9):1271–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Leen E, Ceccotti P, Moug SJ, Glen P, MacQuarrie J, Angerson WJ, et al. Potential value of contrast-enhanced intraoperative ultrasonography during partial hepatectomy for metastases: an essential investigation before resection? Ann Surg. 2006;243(2):236–40.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fioole B, de Haas RJ, Wicherts DA, Elias SG, Scheffers JM, van Hillegersberg R, et al. Additional value of contrast enhanced intraoperative ultrasound for colorectal liver metastases. Eur J Radiol. 2008;67(1):169–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Milsom JW, Jerby BL, Kessler H, Hale JC, Herts BR, O’Malley CM. Prospective, blinded comparison of laparoscopic ultrasonography vs. contrast-enhanced computerized tomography for liver assessment in patients undergoing colorectal carcinoma surgery. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43(1):44–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Shah AJ, Callaway M, Thomas MG, Finch-Jones MD. Contrast-enhanced intraoperative ultrasound improves detection of liver metastases during surgery for primary colorectal cancer. HPB (Oxford). 2010;12(3):181–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hyder O, Dodson RM, Mayo SC, Schneider EB, Weiss MJ, Herman JM, et al. Post-treatment surveillance of patients with colorectal cancer with surgically treated liver metastases. Surgery. 2013;154(2):256–65.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Robinson E, Babb J, Chandarana H, Macari M. Dual source dual energy MDCT: comparison of 80 kVp and weighted average 120 kVp data for conspicuity of hypo-vascular liver metastases. Investig Radiol. 2010;45(7):413–8.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Chan VO, Das JP, Gerstenmaier JF, Geoghegan J, Gibney RG, Collins CD, et al. Diagnostic performance of MDCT, PET/CT and gadoxetic acid (Primovist((R)))-enhanced MRI in patients with colorectal liver metastases being considered for hepatic resection: initial experience in a single centre. Ir J Med Sci. 2012;181(4):499–509.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Floriani I, Torri V, Rulli E, Garavaglia D, Compagnoni A, Salvolini L, et al. Performance of imaging modalities in diagnosis of liver metastases from colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010;31(1):19–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim HJ, Lee SS, Byun JH, Kim JC, Yu CS, Park SH, et al. Incremental value of liver MR imaging in patients with potentially curable colorectal hepatic metastasis detected at CT: a prospective comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging, gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging, and a combination of both MR techniques. Radiology. 2015;274(3):712–22. This study prospectively evaluated the diagnostic performance of CT compared to MRI with a focus on the value of addition of MRI sequences such as DWI and use of liver-specific contrast agents. Results from this study clarify the importance of MRI protocol selection in evaluating patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Regge D, Campanella D, Anselmetti GC, Cirillo S, Gallo TM, Muratore A, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of portal-phase CT and MRI with mangafodipir trisodium in detecting liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Clin Radiol. 2006;61(4):338–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Bipat S, van Leeuwen MS, Comans EF, Pijl ME, Bossuyt PM, Zwinderman AH, et al. Colorectal liver metastases: CT, MR imaging, and PET for diagnosis—meta-analysis. Radiology. 2005;237(1):123–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Holalkere NS, Sahani DV, Blake MA, Halpern EF, Hahn PF, Mueller PR. Characterization of small liver lesions: added role of MR after MDCT. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2006;30(4):591–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Park M, Chung YE, Kim KA, Chung WS, Lee HS, Han KH, et al. Added value of arterial enhancement fraction color maps for the characterization of small hepatic low-attenuating lesions in patients with colorectal cancer. PLoS One. 2015;10(2), e0114819.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Damadian R. Tumor detection by nuclear magnetic resonance. Science. 1971;171(3976):1151–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Quillin SP, Atilla S, Brown JJ, Borrello JA, Yu CY, Pilgram TK. Characterization of focal hepatic masses by dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging: findings in 311 lesions. Magn Reson Imaging. 1997;15(3):275–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Mahfouz AE, Hamm B, Wolf KJ. Peripheral washout: a sign of malignancy on dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR images of focal liver lesions. Radiology. 1994;190(1):49–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Cantwell CP, Setty BN, Holalkere N, Sahani DV, Fischman AJ, Blake MA. Liver lesion detection and characterization in patients with colorectal cancer: a comparison of low radiation dose non-enhanced PET/CT, contrast-enhanced PET/CT, and liver MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2008;32(5):738–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Coenegrachts K, De Geeter F, ter Beek L, Walgraeve N, Bipat S, Stoker J, et al. Comparison of MRI (including SS SE-EPI and SPIO-enhanced MRI) and FDG-PET/CT for the detection of colorectal liver metastases. Eur Radiol. 2009;19(2):370–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Van Beers BE, Pastor CM, Hussain HK. Primovist, Eovist: what to expect? J Hepatol. 2012;57(2):421–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Cho JY, Lee YJ, Han HS, Yoon YS, Kim J, Choi Y, et al. Role of gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative evaluation of small hepatic lesions in patients with colorectal cancer. World J Surg. 2015;39(5):1161–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Jeong HT, Kim MJ, Park MS, Choi JY, Choi JS, Kim KS, et al. Detection of liver metastases using gadoxetic-enhanced dynamic and 10- and 20 minute delayed phase MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;35(3):635–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Kim YK, Lee MW, Lee WJ, Kim SH, Rhim H, Lim JH, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity of diffusion-weighted and of gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3-T MR imaging alone or in combination in the detection of small liver metastasis (</= 1.5 cm in diameter). Invest Radiol. 2012;47(3):159–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Koh DM, Collins DJ, Wallace T, Chau I, Riddell AM. Combining diffusion-weighted MRI with Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI improves the detection of colorectal liver metastases. Br J Radiol. 2012;85(1015):980–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Macera A, Lario C, Petracchini M, Gallo T, Regge D, Floriani I, et al. Staging of colorectal liver metastases after preoperative chemotherapy. Diffusion-weighted imaging in combination with Gd-EOB-DTPA MRI sequences increases sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(3):739–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Tajima T, Akahane M, Takao H, Akai H, Kiryu S, Imamura H, et al. Detection of liver metastasis: is diffusion-weighted imaging needed in Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging for evaluation of colorectal liver metastases? Jpn J Radiol. 2012;30(8):648–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Yonekura Y, Benua RS, Brill AB, Som P, Yeh SD, Kemeny NE, et al. Increased accumulation of 2-deoxy-2-[18F] fluoro-D-glucose in liver metastases from colon carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 1982;23(12):1133–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Kelloff GJ, Hoffman JM, Johnson B, Scher HI, Siegel BA, Cheng EY, et al. Progress and promise of FDG-PET imaging for cancer patient management and oncologic drug development. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(8):2785–808.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Maffione AM, Lopci E, Bluemel C, Giammarile F, Herrmann K, Rubello D. Diagnostic accuracy and impact on management of (18)F-FDG PET and PET/CT in colorectal liver metastasis: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42(1):152–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Wiering B, Ruers TJ, Krabbe PF, Dekker HM, Oyen WJ. Comparison of multiphase CT, FDG-PET and intra-operative ultrasound in patients with colorectal liver metastases selected for surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(2):818–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Briggs RH, Chowdhury FU, Lodge JP, Scarsbrook AF. Clinical impact of FDG PET-CT in patients with potentially operable metastatic colorectal cancer. Clin Radiol. 2011;66(12):1167–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Ruers TJ, Wiering B, van der Sijp JR, Roumen RM, de Jong KP, Comans EF, et al. Improved selection of patients for hepatic surgery of colorectal liver metastases with (18)F-FDG PET: a randomized study. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(7):1036–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Wiering B, Krabbe PF, Jager GJ, Oyen WJ, Ruers TJ. The impact of fluor-18-deoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in the management of colorectal liver metastases. Cancer. 2005;104(12):2658–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Moulton CA, Gu CS, Law CH, Tandan VR, Hart R, Quan D, et al. Effect of PET before liver resection on surgical management for colorectal adenocarcinoma metastases: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2014;311(18):1863–9. This multi-institutional randomized clinical trial evaluated the role of PET/CT in patients with surgically resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases. Findings that the value of PET/CT for this patient cohort is uncertain challenge much of the retrospective, single-center data that advocate for the widespread use of PET/CT.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Eiber M, Fingerle AA, Brugel M, Gaa J, Rummeny EJ, Holzapfel K. Detection and classification of focal liver lesions in patients with colorectal cancer: retrospective comparison of diffusion-weighted MR imaging and multi-slice CT. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(4):683–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Scharitzer M, Ba-Ssalamah A, Ringl H, Kolblinger C, Grunberger T, Weber M, et al. Preoperative evaluation of colorectal liver metastases: comparison between gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0-T MRI and contrast-enhanced MDCT with histopathological correlation. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(8):2187–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Ward J, Robinson PJ, Guthrie JA, Downing S, Wilson D, Lodge JP, et al. Liver metastases in candidates for hepatic resection: comparison of helical CT and gadolinium- and SPIO-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 2005;237(1):170–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Donati OF, Hany TF, Reiner CS, von Schulthess GK, Marincek B, Seifert B, et al. Value of retrospective fusion of PET and MR images in detection of hepatic metastases: comparison with 18F-FDG PET/CT and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI. J Nucl Med. 2010;51(5):692–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Sahani DV, Kalva SP, Fischman AJ, Kadavigere R, Blake M, Hahn PF, et al. Detection of liver metastases from adenocarcinoma of the colon and pancreas: comparison of mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced liver MRI and whole-body FDG PET. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;185(1):239–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Mainenti PP, Mancini M, Mainolfi C, Camera L, Maurea S, Manchia A, et al. Detection of colo-rectal liver metastases: prospective comparison of contrast enhanced US, multidetector CT, PET/CT, and 1.5 Tesla MR with extracellular and reticulo-endothelial cell specific contrast agents. Abdom Imaging. 2010;35(5):511–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Maas M, Rutten IJ, Nelemans PJ, Lambregts DM, Cappendijk VC, Beets GL, et al. What is the most accurate whole-body imaging modality for assessment of local and distant recurrent disease in colorectal cancer? A meta-analysis : imaging for recurrent colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(8):1560–71.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Rappeport ED, Loft A, Berthelsen AK, von der Recke P, Larsen PN, Mogensen AM, et al. Contrast-enhanced FDG-PET/CT vs. SPIO-enhanced MRI vs. FDG-PET vs. CT in patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer: a prospective study with intraoperative confirmation. Acta Radiol. 2007;48(4):369–78.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Choi H, Charnsangavej C, Faria SC, Macapinlac HA, Burgess MA, Patel SR, et al. Correlation of computed tomography and positron emission tomography in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated at a single institution with imatinib mesylate: proposal of new computed tomography response criteria. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(13):1753–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Auer RC, White RR, Kemeny NE, Schwartz LH, Shia J, Blumgart LH, et al. Predictors of a true complete response among disappearing liver metastases from colorectal cancer after chemotherapy. Cancer. 2010;116(6):1502–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Benoist S, Brouquet A, Penna C, Julie C, El Hajjam M, Chagnon S, et al. Complete response of colorectal liver metastases after chemotherapy: does it mean cure? J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(24):3939–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Angliviel B, Benoist S, Penna C, El Hajjam M, Chagnon S, Julie C, et al. Impact of chemotherapy on the accuracy of computed tomography scan for the evaluation of colorectal liver metastases. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(5):1247–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Berger-Kulemann V, Schima W, Baroud S, Koelblinger C, Kaczirek K, Gruenberger T, et al. Gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0 T MR imaging versus multidetector-row CT in the detection of colorectal metastases in fatty liver using intraoperative ultrasound and histopathology as a standard of reference. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012;38(8):670–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Kulemann V, Schima W, Tamandl D, Kaczirek K, Gruenberger T, Wrba F, et al. Preoperative detection of colorectal liver metastases in fatty liver: MDCT or MRI? Eur J Radiol. 2011;79(2):e1–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Lubezky N, Metser U, Geva R, Nakache R, Shmueli E, Klausner JM, et al. The role and limitations of 18-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) scan and computerized tomography (CT) in restaging patients with hepatic colorectal metastases following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: comparison with operative and pathological findings. J Gastrointest Surg. 2007;11(4):472–8.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Akhurst T, Kates TJ, Mazumdar M, Yeung H, Riedel ER, Burt BM, et al. Recent chemotherapy reduces the sensitivity of [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the detection of colorectal metastases. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(34):8713–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Bacigalupo L, Aufort S, Eberle MC, Assenat E, Ychou M, Gallix B. Assessment of liver metastases from colorectal adenocarcinoma following chemotherapy: SPIO-MRI versus FDG-PET/CT. Radiol Med. 2010;115(7):1087–100.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Glazer ES, Beaty K, Abdalla EK, Vauthey JN, Curley SA. Effectiveness of positron emission tomography for predicting chemotherapy response in colorectal cancer liver metastases. Arch Surg. 2010;145(4):340–5. discussion 345.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Arita J, Ono Y, Takahashi M, Inoue Y, Takahashi Y, Saiura A. Usefulness of contrast-enhanced intraoperative ultrasound in identifying disappearing liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma after chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21 Suppl 3:S390–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Ruzzenente A, Conci S, Iacono C, Valdegamberi A, Campagnaro T, Bertuzzo F, et al. Usefulness of contrast-enhanced intraoperative ultrasonography (CE-IOUS) in patients with colorectal liver metastases after preoperative chemotherapy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013;17(2):281–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Rojas Llimpe FL, Di Fabio F, Ercolani G, Giampalma E, Cappelli A, Serra C, et al. Imaging in resectable colorectal liver metastasis patients with or without preoperative chemotherapy: results of the PROMETEO-01 study. Br J Cancer. 2014;111(4):667–73. This prospective study not only compares diagnostic capabilities of CEUS, CT, MRI, PET/CT, and IOCEUS but also includes analysis of subgroups stratified by receipt of chemotherapy. Results from this recent study reflect those of the current imaging technology available and offer patient-specific data that can be applied clinically.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Kim YS, Rhim H, Lim HK, Choi D, Lee MW, Park MJ. Coagulation necrosis induced by radiofrequency ablation in the liver: histopathologic and radiologic review of usual to extremely rare changes. Radiographics. 2011;31(2):377–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Kuehl H, Antoch G, Stergar H, Veit-Haibach P, Rosenbaum-Krumme S, Vogt F, et al. Comparison of FDG-PET, PET/CT and MRI for follow-up of colorectal liver metastases treated with radiofrequency ablation: initial results. Eur J Radiol. 2008;67(2):362–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Denecke T, Steffen I, Hildebrandt B, Ruhl R, Streitparth F, Lehmkuhl L, et al. Assessment of local control after laser-induced thermotherapy of liver metastases from colorectal cancer: contribution of FDG-PET in patients with clinical suspicion of progressive disease. Acta Radiol. 2007;48(8):821–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Anderson GS, Brinkmann F, Soulen MC, Alavi A, Zhuang H. FDG positron emission tomography in the surveillance of hepatic tumors treated with radiofrequency ablation. Clin Nucl Med. 2003;28(3):192–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Hunt SJ, Yu W, Weintraub J, Prince MR, Kothary N. Radiologic monitoring of hepatocellular carcinoma tumor viability after transhepatic arterial chemoembolization: estimating the accuracy of contrast-enhanced cross-sectional imaging with histopathologic correlation. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2009;20(1):30–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Kamel IR, Bluemke DA, Ramsey D, Abusedera M, Torbenson M, Eng J, et al. Role of diffusion-weighted imaging in estimating tumor necrosis after chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181(3):708–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Liu M, Lin MX, Lu M, Xu ZF, Zheng KG, Wang W, et al. Comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and contrast-enhanced computed tomography in evaluating the treatment response to transcatheter arterial chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma using modified RECIST. Eur Radiol. 2015.

  83. Song HJ, Cheng JY, Hu SL, Zhang GY, Fu Y, Zhang YJ. Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in detecting viable tumour and predicting prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma after TACE. Clin Radiol. 2015;70(2):128–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Kim BK, Kim KA, An C, Yoo EJ, Park JY, Kim DY, et al. Prognostic role of magnetic resonance imaging vs. computed tomography for hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing chemoembolization. Liver Int. 2014.

  85. Deng J, Miller FH, Rhee TK, Sato KT, Mulcahy MF, Kulik LM, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging for determination of hepatocellular carcinoma response to yttrium-90 radioembolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17(7):1195–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Schelhorn J, Best J, Reinboldt MP, Dechene A, Gerken G, Ruhlmann M, et al. Does diffusion-weighted imaging improve therapy response evaluation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after radioembolization? Comparison of MRI using Gd-EOB-DTPA with and without DWI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014.

  87. Bienert M, McCook B, Carr BI, Geller DA, Sheetz M, Amesur N, et al. Sequential FDG PET/CT in 90Y microsphere treatment of unresectable colorectal liver metastases. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32(6):723.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Wong CY, Qing F, Savin M, Campbell J, Gates VL, Sherpa KM, et al. Reduction of metastatic load to liver after intraarterial hepatic yttrium-90 radioembolization as evaluated by [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomographic imaging. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2005;16(8):1101–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Vouche M, Salem R, Miller FH, Lemort M, Vanderlinden B, De Becker D, et al. Y90 radioembolization of colorectal cancer liver metastases: response assessment by contrast-enhanced computed tomography with or without PET-CT guidance. Clin Imaging. 2015.

  90. Sabet A, Meyer C, Aouf A, Sabet A, Ghamari S, Pieper CC, et al. Early post-treatment FDG PET predicts survival after 90Y microsphere radioembolization in liver-dominant metastatic colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42(3):370–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Lauren M. Postlewait and Shishir K. Maithel declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Financial Support

This study is supported in part by the Katz Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, 1365C Clifton Road NE, 2nd Floor, Atlanta, GA, 30322, USA

    Lauren M. Postlewait & Shishir K. Maithel

Authors
  1. Lauren M. Postlewait
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shishir K. Maithel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shishir K. Maithel.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Colorectal Cancer Hepatic Metastases

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Postlewait, L.M., Maithel, S.K. Current Status of Imaging to Evaluate Liver Metastases From Colorectal Cancer. Curr Colorectal Cancer Rep 11, 168–177 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11888-015-0272-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11888-015-0272-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation