Uneven steatosis and focal spared areas: modifications in the echographic pattern during chemotheraphy and clinical correlations
- 31 Downloads
Abstract
Hepatic steatosis induced by antiblastic chemotheraphy leads to differential diagnostic problems. It is difficult to recognize the true nature of hypoechoic areas in fatty liver in neoplastic patients treated by chemotheraphy, because “skip areas” due to nonsteatotic parenchyma and metastases may have very similar appearances. We studied with sonography 61 patients during chemotherapy and at different times during follow-up. The US findings were compared with laboratory data (liver function tests, serum cholesterol, and triglycerides). The final diagnosis was made by CT examination and/or liver biopsy. No correlations were found between US and laboratory data. However, a mean time could be determined for the occurrence of hepatic steatosis (diffuse steatosis: 72 days, SD ± 15 days; focal steatosis: 53 days, SD ± 12 days) as well as for its regression (53 days, SD ± 9 days for diffuse steatosis and 62 days, SD ± 15 days for focal steatosis) in close temporal relationship with previous chemotheraphy. These data might be of diagnostic value in the US assessment of neoplastic patients upon follow-up. In fact, focal hypoechoic areas occuring within the mean expected time in which steatosis takes place should more likely be benign (skip areas), and as such, disappear when liver steatosis regresses. On the contrary, the persistence of such images as well as their appearance beyond the expected mean time for hepatic steatosis to occur are highly suspicious for metastases and require further diagnostic work-up (CT, biopsy).
Key words
Hepatic steatosis Liver Ultrasonography Skip areas Antiblastic chemotheraphyPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Leevy CM, Tygstrup N (1976) Metabolic disorders and fatty liver. In: Standardization of nomenclature, diagnostic criteria and diagnostic methodology for diseases of the liver and biliary tract. S. Karger AG (EDR), Basel, pp 36–43Google Scholar
- 2.Halvorsen RA, Korobkin M, Ram PC et al. (1982) CT appearance of focal fatty infiltration of the liver. AJR 139: 278–281Google Scholar
- 3.Berland L (1986) Focal areas of decreased echogenicity in the liver at the porta hepatis. J Ultrasound Med 5: 157–159Google Scholar
- 4.Marchal G, Tshibwabwa-Tumba E, Verbeken E et al. (1986) “Skip areas” in hepatic steatosis: a sonographic-angiographic study. Gastrointest Radiol 11: 151–157Google Scholar
- 5.White EM, Simeone JF, Mueller PR et al. (1987) Focal periportal sparing in hepatic fatty infiltration: a cause of hepatic pseudomass on US. Radiology 162: 57–59Google Scholar
- 6.Scatarige JC, Scott WW, Donovan PJ et al. (1984) Fatty infiltration of the liver: ultrasonographic and computed tomographic correlation. J Ultrasound Med 3: 9–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 7.Lates CK, Streight RA (1986) Focal infiltration of liver simulating metastatic disease. Radiology 159: 83–84Google Scholar
- 8.Ferrucci JT (1990) Liver tumor imaging: current concept. AJR 155: 473–484Google Scholar