Advertisement

Abdominal Imaging

, Volume 40, Issue 7, pp 2306–2312 | Cite as

Liver parenchyma at the site of hypodense parafissural pseudolesion contains increased collagen

  • Lianne J. P. Sonnemans
  • Nils Köster
  • Mathias Prokop
  • Jeroen A. W. M. van der Laak
  • Willemijn M. KleinEmail author
Article
  • 190 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

To identify a histological substrate explaining the hypodense pseudolesion in the liver at the right side of the falciform ligament and the correlation with CT radiodensity.

Materials and methods

Tissue specimens were obtained from the right (pseudolesion) and left (control) side of the falciform ligament at the level of the left portal vein, in deceased adults during autopsy. Radiodensity was measured at the same locations at CT. Digital image analysis determined the amount of collagen and fat in histological sections, and the number of portal triads and central veins were counted. Glycogen content was visually assessed by the area percentage of the histological section.

Results

Specimens from 17 patients showed a 39% increase in collagen for the site of the pseudolesion compared to the contralateral side (p = 0.08). No significant differences were found for the amount of fat, glycogen, portal triads, or central veins. In one patient a pseudolesion was visible on CT, and this contained 52% more collagen than the control side.

Conclusion

The pseudolesion at the right parafissural side in the liver contains more collagen compared to the control left side, while there is no difference in fat or glycogen content or number of portal and hepatic veins. Collagen may be the cause of the pseudolesion.

Keywords

Liver Computer tomography Pseudolesion Histology 

Abbreviations

CT

Computed tomography

MRI

Magnetic resonance imaging

PAS

Periodic acid Schiff

HE

Hematoxylin and eosin

EVG

Elastin Van Gieson

HU

Hounsfield unit

PMI

Post-mortem interval

ICC

Intraclass correlation coefficient

References

  1. 1.
    Genchellac H, Yilmaz S, Ucar A, et al. (2007) Hepatic pseudolesion around the falciform ligament: prevalence, aberrant venous supply, and fatty infiltration evaluated by multidetector computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 31(4):526–533CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Koseoglu K, Ozsunar Y, Taskin F, Karaman C (2005) Pseudolesions of left liver lobe during helical CT examinations: prevalence and comparison between unenhanced and biphasic CT findings. Eur J Radiol 54(3):388–392CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ucar A, Sahin D, Bulakci M, et al. (2011) Prevalence of hepatic pseudolesions around the falciform ligament in a paediatric population. J Int Med Res 39(4):1490–1496CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yoshimitsu K, Honda H, Kuroiwa T, et al. (2001) Unusual hemodynamics and pseudolesions of the noncirrhotic liver at CT. Radiographics 21:S81–96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baker AL, Rosenberg IH (1987) Hepatic complications of total parenteral nutrition. Am J Med 82(3):489–497CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mak KM, Chu E, Lau KH, Kwong AJ (2012) Liver fibrosis in elderly cadavers: localization of collagen types I, III, and IV, α-smooth muscle actin, and elastic fibers. Anat Rec (Hoboken) 295(7):1159–1167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Annet L, Materne R, Danse E, et al. (2003) Hepatic flow parameters measured with MR imaging and Doppler US: correlations with degree of cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Radiology 229(2):409–414CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hagiwara M, Rusinek H, Lee VS, et al. (2008) Advanced liver fibrosis: diagnosis with 3D whole-liver perfusion MR imaging—initial experience. Radiology 246(3):926–934CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chundru S, Kalb B, Arif-Tiwari H, et al. (2013) MRI of diffuse liver disease: the common and uncommon etiologies. Diagn Interv Radiol 19(6):479–487PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kobayashi S, Matsui O, Kadoya M, et al. (2001) CT arteriographic confirmation of focal hepatic fatty infiltration adjacent to the falciform ligament associated with drainage of inferior vein of Sappey: a case report. Radiat Med 19(1):51–54PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Basaran C, Karcaaltincaba M, Akata D, et al. (2005) Fat-containing lesions of the liver: cross-sectional imaging findings with emphasis on MRI. Am J Roentgenol 184(4):1103–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Unal E, Ozmen MN, Akata D, Karcaaltincaba M (2015) Imaging of aberrant left gastric vein and associated pseudolesions of segments II and III of the liver and mimickers. Diagn Interv Radiol 21(2):105–110PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Paulson EK, Baker ME, Spritzer CE, et al. (1993) Focal fatty infiltration: a cause of nontumorous defects in the left hepatic lobe during CT arterial portography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 17(4):590–595CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Matsui O, Kadoya M, Takahashi S, et al. (1995) Focal sparing of segment IV in fatty livers shown by sonography and CT: correlation with aberrant gastic venous drainage. Am J Roentgenol 164(5):1137–1140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Flach PM, Thali MJ, Germerott T (2014) Times have changed! Forensic radiology—a new challenge for radiology and forensic pathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202(4):W325–W334CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Roberts IS, Benamore RE, Benbow EW, et al. (2012) Post-mortem imaging as an alternative to autopsy in the diagnosis of adult deaths: a validation study. Lancet 379(9811):136–142PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thayyil S, Sebire NJ, Chitty LS, et al. (2013) Post-mortem MRI versus conventional autopsy in fetuses and children: a prospective validation study. Lancet 382(9888):223–233CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lamb P, Sahani D, Fuentes-Oreego J, et al. (2014) Stratification of Patients with Liver Fibrosis Using Dual-Energy CT. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2014.2353044 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Oğul H, Kantarcı M, Genç B, et al. (2014) Perfusion CT imaging of the liver: review of clinical applications. Diagn Interv Radiol 20(5):379–389PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lianne J. P. Sonnemans
    • 1
  • Nils Köster
    • 2
  • Mathias Prokop
    • 1
  • Jeroen A. W. M. van der Laak
    • 2
  • Willemijn M. Klein
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Radiology and Nuclear MedicineRadboud University Medical CentreNijmegenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of PathologyRadboud University Medical CentreNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations