Advertisement

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound patterns of hepatocellular adenoma: an Italian multicenter experience

  • Matteo Garcovich
  • Mariella Faccia
  • Franca Meloni
  • Emanuela Bertolini
  • Ilario de Sio
  • Giosuele Calabria
  • Giampiero Francica
  • Gianpaolo Vidili
  • Laura Riccardi
  • Maria Assunta Zocco
  • Maria Elena Ainora
  • Francesca Romana Ponziani
  • Anna Maria De Gaetano
  • Antonio Gasbarrini
  • Gian Ludovico Rapaccini
  • Maurizio Pompili
Original Article
  • 29 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Hepatocellular adenoma (HCA) is a rare benign monoclonal neoplasm, recently categorized on genetic and histopathological basis into four subtypes with different biological behaviors. Since contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) is nowadays a well-established technique for liver nodule characterization, the aim of our study was to assess CEUS features of HCAs to identify criteria that correlate with different HCA subtypes as compared to histopathologic examination and other imaging modalities.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed data of patients with histology-proven HCA who underwent CEUS, computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in seven different Italian ultrasound units.

Results

The study enrolled 19 patients (16 females; 69% with concomitant/prior use of oral contraceptives): the mean size of all HCAs was 4.2 cm (range 1.6–7.1 cm); 14/19 had inflammatory HCAs (I-HCA), 1/19 β-catenin-activated HCA, and the others unclassified HCAs. On CEUS, during the arterial phase, all but one HCA displayed a rapid enhancement, with 89% of these showing centripetal and 11% centrifugal filling pattern, whereas during the portal and late venous phase 58% of HCA showed washout and the remaining 42% displayed persistent enhancement. In particular, among I-HCAs 7/14 showed no washout, 3/14 and 4/14 showed washout in the portal or late phase, respectively.

Conclusions

This dataset represents one of the few published experiences on HCAs and CEUS in Italy and shows that HCAs are hypervascularized in the arterial phase usually with a centripetal flow pattern and have a heterogeneous behavior in portal and late phase. In particular, occurrence of delayed washout on CEUS but not on MRI is frequently observed in the subtype of I-HCA.

Keywords

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound Hepatocellular adenoma Phenotype classification Benign liver lesion Magnetic resonance imaging 

Riassunto

Introduzione

L′adenoma epatico (HCA) rappresenta una rara neoplasia primitiva del fegato, recentemente classificata in quattro diversi sottotipi sulla base delle caratteristiche istopatologiche e del comportamento biologico. In considerazione dell’ampio e diffuso utilizzo dell’ecografia con mezzo di contrasto ecografico (CEUS) nella valutazione non-invasiva delle lesioni focali epatiche l’obiettivo di questo studio è stato quello di documentare in una casistica multicentrica le caratteristiche CEUS di lesioni focali epatiche già caratterizzate come HCA e di valutare le eventuali correlazioni con i diversi sottotipi istologici e con altre metodiche di imaging (CT/MRI).

Metodi

Sono stati raccolti retrospettivamente le informazioni su pazienti con diagnosi istologica di HCA sottoposti a CEUS e CT ± MR in sette diversi centri italiani di ecografia.

Risultati

Sono stati inclusi nello studio 19 pazienti con diagnosi istologica di HCA (16 donne; 69% con storia attuale e/o pregressa di utilizzo di farmaci estroprogestinici): 14/19 adenomi sottotipo “infiammatori” (IHCA), 1/19 β-catenin-activated HCA e i restanti erano HCA non classificabili. L’esame CEUS ha mostrato nella quasi totalità dei casi (18/19) un rapido enhancement arterioso di tipo centripeto (89%) o centrifugo (11%). Durante la fase portale e tardiva si è dimostrato un wash-out contrastografico rispettivamente nel 58% degli HCA; invece nel 42% dei rimanenti casi non è stato osservato wash-out in nessuna delle fasi contrastografiche. In particolare è stato evidenziato che nel sottotipo I-HCA 7/14 non presentavano washout in nessuna delle fasi contrastografiche, mentre 3/14 e 4/14 mostravano rispettivamente un washout nelle fasi portali o tardive.

Conclusioni

La nostra casistica rappresenta una delle poche esperienze italiane presenti in letteratura riguardo all’utilizzo della CEUS negli adenomi epatici, confermando l’aspetto di ipervascolarizzazione nella fase arteriosa (soprattutto con un flusso centripeto) ed il comportamento eterogeneo nelle fasi portali e tardive. In particolare, nel caso di I-HCA un comportamento contrastografico caratterizzato da washout in fase tardiva è frequente con l’utilizzo della CEUS ma non con l’utilizzo della MRI.

Notes

Funding

All authors received no specific funding for this work.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Catholic University of Sacred Heart. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study formal consent is not required.

References

  1. 1.
    Lin H, van den Esschert J, Liu C et al (2011) Systematic review of hepatocellular adenoma in China and other regions. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 26(1):28–35CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rooks JB, Ory HW, Ishak KG et al (1979) Epidemiology of hepatocellular adenoma. The role of oral contraceptive use. JAMA 242:644–648CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nakao A, Sakagami K, Nakata Y et al (2000) Multiple hepatic adenomas caused by long-term administration of androgenic steroids for aplastic anemia in association with familial adenomatous polyposis. J Gastroenterol 35:557–562CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Labrune P, Trioche P, Duvaltier I et al (1997) Hepatocellular adenomas in glycogen storage disease type I and III: a series of 43 patients and review of the literature. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 24:276–279CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Socas L, Zumbado M, Perez-Luzardo O et al (2005) Hepatocellular adenomas associated with anabolic androgenic steroid abuse in bodybuilders: a report of two cases and a review of the literature. Br J Sports Med 39(5):e27CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chang CY, Hernandez-Prera JC, Roayaie S et al (2013) Changing epidemiology of hepatocellular adenoma in the United States: review of the literature. Int J Hepatol 2013:604860CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Van Aalten SM, De Man RA, IJzermans JN et al (2012) Systematic review of haemorrhage and rupture of hepatocellular adenomas. Br J Surg 99(7):911–916CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stoot JH, Coelen RJ, De Jong MC et al (2010) Malignant transformation of hepatocellular adenomas into hepatocellular carcinomas: a systematic review including more than 1600 adenoma cases. HPB 12(8):509–522CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zucman-Rossi J, Jeannot E, Nhieu JT et al (2006) Genotype–phenotype correlation in hepatocellular adenoma: new classification and relationship with HCC. Hepatology 43(3):515–524CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bioulac-Sage P, Laumonier H, Couchy G et al (2009) Hepatocellular adenoma management and phenotypic classification: the Bordeaux experience. Hepatology 50(2):481–489CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) (2016) EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines on the management of benign liver tumours. J Hepatol 65(2):386–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hussain SM, van den Bos IC, Dwarkasing RS et al (2006) Hepatocellular adenoma: findings at state-of-the-art magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, computed tomography and pathologic analysis. Eur Radiol 16(9):1873–1886CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Laumonier H, Bioulac-Sage P, Laurent C et al (2008) Hepatocellular adenomas: magnetic resonance imaging features as a function of molecular pathological classification. Hepatology 48:808–818CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dharmana H, Saravana-Bawan S, Girgis S et al (2017) Hepatocellular adenoma: imaging review of the various molecular subtypes. Clin Radiol 72(4):276–285CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Laumonier H, Cailliez H, Balabaud C et al (2012) Role of contrast-enhanced sonography in differentiation of subtypes of hepatocellular adenoma: correlation with MRI findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199(2):341–348CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Manichon AF, Bancel B, Durieux-Millon M et al (2012) Hepatocellular adenoma: evaluation with contrast-enhanced ultrasound and MRI and correlation with pathologic and phenotypic classification in 26 lesions. HPB Surg 2012:418745CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dong Y, Zhu Z, Wang WP et al (2016) Ultrasound features of hepatocellular adenoma and the additional value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 15(1):48–54CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Claudon M, Dietrich CF, Choi BI et al (2013) Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the liver—update 2012: a WFUMB-EFSUMB initiative in cooperation with representatives of AFSUMB, AIUM, ASUM, FLAUS and ICUS. World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine; European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol 39(2):187–210CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Katabathina VS, Menias CO, Shanbhogue AK et al (2011) Genetics and imaging of hepatocellular adenomas: 2011 update. RadioGraphics 31(6):1529–1543CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rebouissou S, Amessou M, Couchy G et al (2009) Frequent in-frame somatic deletions activate gp130 in inflammatory hepatocellular tumours. Nature 457:200–204CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Taimr P, Bröker MEE, Dwarkasing RS et al (2017) A model-based prediction of the probability of hepatocellular adenoma and focal nodular hyperplasia based on characteristics on contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol 10:2144–2150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Guo Y, Li W, Cai W et al (2017) Diagnostic value of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging to distinguish HCA and its subtype from FNH: a systematic review. Int J Med Sci 14(7):668–674CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wilson SR, Kim TK, Jang HJ et al (2007) Enhancement patterns of focal liver masses: discordance between contrast-enhanced sonography and contrast-enhanced CT and MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189(1):W7–W12CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Società Italiana di Ultrasonologia in Medicina e Biologia (SIUMB) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matteo Garcovich
    • 1
  • Mariella Faccia
    • 1
  • Franca Meloni
    • 2
    • 3
  • Emanuela Bertolini
    • 4
  • Ilario de Sio
    • 5
  • Giosuele Calabria
    • 6
  • Giampiero Francica
    • 7
  • Gianpaolo Vidili
    • 8
  • Laura Riccardi
    • 1
  • Maria Assunta Zocco
    • 1
  • Maria Elena Ainora
    • 1
  • Francesca Romana Ponziani
    • 1
  • Anna Maria De Gaetano
    • 9
  • Antonio Gasbarrini
    • 1
  • Gian Ludovico Rapaccini
    • 1
  • Maurizio Pompili
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Internal Medicine and GastroenterologyFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic University of Sacred HeartRomeItaly
  2. 2.Department of Interventional UltrasoundCasa di Cura IgeaMilanItaly
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA
  4. 4.Department of Internal Medicine, Hepatology and GastroenterologySan Paolo Hospital, Università degli Studi di MilanoMilanItaly
  5. 5.Hepatogastroenterology UnitUniversità degli Studi della Campania Luigi VanvitelliNaplesItaly
  6. 6.IX Interventional Ultrasound Unit for Infectious DiseasesAORN dei Colli, Cotugno HospitalNaplesItaly
  7. 7.Interventional Ultrasound UnitPineta Grande HospitalCastel VolturnoItaly
  8. 8.Department of Clinical and Experimental MedicineUniversity of SassariSassariItaly
  9. 9.Department of RadiologyFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Catholic University of Sacred HeartRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations