La radiologia medica

, Volume 114, Issue 6, pp 935–947 | Cite as

Small (≤2 cm) atypical hepatic haemangiomas in the non-cirrhotic patient: pattern-based classification scheme for enhancement at triple-phase helical CT

  • M. Scialpi
  • L. Volterrani
  • M.A. Mazzei
  • S. Cappabianca
  • F. Barberini
  • I. Piscioli
  • L. Brunese
  • L. Lupattelli
Abdominal Radiology/Radiologia Addominale

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to determine by triplephase helical computed tomography (CT) the appearance of atypical small (≤2 cm) hepatic haemangiomas (HHs) in the non-cirrhotic patient.

Materials and methods

We retrospectively reviewed the hepatic arterial-dominant phase (HAP), portal venous phase (PVP) and delayed-phase (DP) helical CT images of 47 patients with 52 atypical small (≤2cm) HHs associated with 34 typical small HHs. Images were assessed to identify the patterns of enhancement of atypical HHs and correlate their appearance with that of typical small HHs in the delayed phase. Interobserver variability and kappa value were calculated. Statistical significance was calculated by the Fisher exact test.

Results

The 52 atypical small HHs were categorised as follows: type 1a (hyperattenuating in the HAP, n=17), type 1b [hyperattenuating with transient hepatic attenuation difference (THAD) around the lesion in the HAP, n=12], type 2a (homogeneously hypoattenuating in the HAP or PVP, n=9), type 2b (hypoattenuating with “bright-dot” sign in the HAP or PVP, n=13) and type 3 (hypoattenuating with central enhancing area, n=1). Interobserver agreement was perfect for HHs of types 1a, 1b, 2a and 3. On DP images, the appearance of atypical small HHs was identical to that of typical small HHs in all cases (p<0.0001), with lesions showing homogeneous isoattenuation to the aorta or liver parenchyma without peripheral capsule.

Conclusions

Triple-phase helical CT scans can distinguish several types of atypical small HHs. The demonstration of patterns similar to those of typical forms on DP CT is fundamental for the diagnosis.

Keywords

Liver Tumors Hepatic haemangioma Triphasic Computed Tomography 

Emangiomi epatici atipici di piccole dimensioni (≤2 cm) nel paziente non-cirrotico: classificazione in base al pattern di enhancement in TC spirale trifasica

Riassunto

Obiettivo

Determinare mediante tomografia computerizzata (TC) spirale trifasica l’aspetto degli emangiomi epatici (EE) atipici di piccole dimensioni (≤2 cm) in pazienti con fegato non-cirrotico.

Materiali e metodi

Sono stati valutati retrospettivamente gli esami TC trifasici in fase dominante-arteriosa (FA), fase venosa portale (FVP) e fase tardiva (FT), di 47 pazienti con 52 emangiomi epatici (EE) atipici di piccole dimensioni (≤2 cm) associati a 34 EE tipici piccoli. Le immagini sono state esaminate al fine di individuare i patterns di enhancement degli EE atipici e correlare in FT il loro aspetto con quello degli EE piccoli tipici. Sono state calcolate la variabilita interosservatore e le differenze statistiche mediante il test esatto di Fisher.

Risultati

I 52 EE atipici di piccole dimensioni erano così distribuiti: tipo 1a EE iperdenso in FA (n=17), tipo 1b EE iperdenso con transient hepatic attenuation difference (THAD) in FA (n=12), tipo 2a EE ipodenso in FA o FVP (n=9), tipo 2b EE ipodenso con puntiforme/i iperdensita periferica in FA o FVP (n=13), e tipo 3 EE ipodenso con iperdensità centrale ad enhancement centrifugo in FVP (n=1). È stata riscontrata completa concordanza tra i tre osservatori relativamente agli EE di tipo 1a, 1b, 2a, e 3. In FT l’aspetto degli EE atipici di piccole dimensioni (isodensità rispetto all’aorta o al parenchima epatico con assenza di capsula periferica) è risultato sovrapponibile a quello degli EE tipici di piccole dimensioni (p<0,0001).

Conclusioni

La TC trifasica consente di distinguere diverse forme di EE atipici di piccole dimensioni che in FT presentano aspetto analogo alle forme tipiche di piccole dimensioni.

Parole chiave

Fegato Neoplasie Emangioma epatico Tomografia Computerizzata trifasica 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References/Bibliografia

  1. 1.
    Ishak KG, Rabin L (1975) Benign tumors of the liver. Med Clin North Am 59:995–1013PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berland LL (1995) Slip-ring and conventional dynamic hepatic CT: contrast material and timing considerations. Radiology 195:1–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hanafusa K, Ohashi I, Hilmeno Y et al (1995) Hepatic hemangioma: findings with two-phase CT. Radiology 196:465–469PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jang HJ, Choi BI, Kim TK et al (1998) Atypical small hemangiomas of the liver: “bright dot” sign at two-phase spiral CT. Radiology 208:543–548PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yun EJ, Jang HJ, Kim TK et al (1998) Hepatic hemangiomas: contrast enhancement patterns on two-phase spiral CT. J Korean Radiol Soc 38:93–98Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim KW, Kim TK, Han JK et al (2001) Hepatic hemangiomas with arterioportal shunt: findings at twophase CT. Radiology 219:707–711PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Van Leuveen MS, Noordzij J, Feldberg MAM et al (1996) Focal liver lesions: characterization with triphasic spiral CT. Radiology 201:327–336Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Itai Y, Matsui O (1997) Blood flow and liver imaging. Radiology 202:306–314PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Oliver JH III, Baron RL (1996) Helical biphasic contrast-enhanced CT of the liver: technique, indications, interpretations and pittfalls. Radiology 201:1–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Colagrande S, Centi N, Carmigiani L et al (2003) Significato ed eziopatogenesi dei fenomeni arteriali epatici (THAD) settoriali Radiol Med 105:180–187PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stanley RH, Lauri AA (eds) (2000) World Health Organization classification of tumours: pathology and genetics, tumours of the digestive system, IARC Press, LyonGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sheth S, Lai CK, Dry S et al (2008) Benign vascular tumors and tumor-like proliferations. Semin Diagn Pathol 25:1–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nghiem HV, Bogost GA, Ryan JA et al (1997) Cavernous hemangiomas of the liver: enlargement over time. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:137–140PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim S, Chung JJ, Kim MJ et al (2000) Atypical inside-out pattern of hepatic hemangiomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174:1571–1574PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yamashita Y, Ogata I, Urata J et al (1997) Cavernous hemangioma of the liver: pathologic correlation with dynamic CT findings. Radiology 203:121–125PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Byun JH, Kim TK, Lee CW et al (2004) Arterioportal shunt: prevalence in small hemangiomas versus that in hepatocellular carcinomas 3 cm or smaller at two-phase helical CT. Radiology 232:354–360PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jeong MG, Yu JS, Kim KW (2000) Hepatic cavernous hemangioma: temporal peritumoral enhancement during multiphase dynamic MR imaging. Radiology 216:692–697PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kim T, Federle MP, Baron RL et al (2001) Discrimination of small hepatic hemangiomas from hypervascular malignant tumors smaller than 3 cm with three-phase helical CT. Radiology 219:699–706PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Barnett P, Zerhouni E, White R et al (1980) Computed tomography in the diagnosis of cavernous hemangioma of the liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 134:439–447PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Welch TJ, Sheedy PF, Johnson CM et al (1985) Focal nodular hyperplasia and hepatic adenoma: comparison of angiography, CT, US, and scintigraphy. Radiology 156:593–595PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Welch TJ, Sheedy PF, Johnson CM et al (1985) Radiologic characteristics of benign liver tumors: focal nodular hyperplasia and hepatic adenoma. RadioGraphics 5:673–682Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mathieu D, Bruneton JN, Drouillard J et al (1986) Hepatic adenomas and focal nodular hyperplasia: dynamic CT study. Radiology 160:53–58PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Grazioli L, Federle MP, Brancatelli G et al (2001) Hepatic adenomas: imaging and pathologic findings. RadioGraphics 21:877–892PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ichikawa T, Federle MP, Grazioli L et al (2000) Hepatocellular adenoma: multiphasic CT and histopathologic findings in 25 patients. Radiology 214:861–868PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ichikawa T, Federle MP, Grazioli L et al (1999) Fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma: imaging and pathologic findings in 31 recent cases. Radiology 213:352–361PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Muramatsu Y, Takayasu K, Moriyama N et al (1986) Peripheral low-density area of hepatic tumors: CT pathologiccorrelation. Radiology 160:49–52PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Oliver JH, III, Baron RL, Federle MP et al (1997) Hypervascular liver metastases: do unenhanced and hepatic arterial phase CT images affect tumor detection?. Radiology 205:709–715PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ashida C, Fishman E, Zerhouni E et al (1987) Computed tomography of hepatic cavernous hemangioma. J Comput Assist Tomogr 11:455–460PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Heiken JP, Brink JA, McClennan BL et al (1995) Dynamic incremental CT: effect of volume and concentration of contrast material and patient weight on hepatic enhancement. Radiology 195:353–357PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Brink JA, Heiken JP, Forman HP et al (1995) Hepatic spiral CT: reduction of dose of intravenous contrast material. Radiology 197:83–88PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Itoh S, Ikeda M, Achiwa M et al (2004) Late-arterial and portal-venous phase imaging of the liver with a multislice CT scanner in patients without circulatory disturbances: automatic bolus tracking or empirical scan delay? Eur Radiol 14:1665–1673PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Choi BI, Lee HJ, Han JK et al (1997) Detection of hypervascular nodular hepatocellular carcinomas: value of triphasic helical CT compared with iodized-oil CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 168:219–224PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Scialpi
    • 1
  • L. Volterrani
    • 2
  • M.A. Mazzei
    • 2
  • S. Cappabianca
    • 3
  • F. Barberini
    • 4
  • I. Piscioli
    • 5
  • L. Brunese
    • 6
  • L. Lupattelli
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Scienze Chirurgiche, Radiologiche e Odontostomatologiche, Sezione di Radiologia Diagnostica ed InterventisticaUniversità di Perugia, Ospedale S. Maria della MisericordiaPerugiaItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Patologia Umana ed Oncologia, Sezione di Scienze RadiologicheUniversità di SienaSienaItaly
  3. 3.Dipartimento di Medicina Clinica e Sperimentale e Chirurgia “F. Magrassi”II Università di Napoli, Azienda Ospedaliera UniversitariaNapoliItaly
  4. 4.Dipartimento di Scienze Chirurgiche, Radiologiche e OdontostomatologicheUnità di Oncologia Chirurgica Università di Perugia, Ospedale S. Maria della MisericordiaPerugiaItaly
  5. 5.Dipartimento di RadiologiaOspedale di Budrio, Azienda Sanitaria Locale BolognaBudrioItaly
  6. 6.Dipartimento di Scienze della Salute, Sezione di Diagnostica per ImmaginiUniversità del MoliseCampobassoItaly

Personalised recommendations