Advertisement

Abdominal Radiology

, Volume 42, Issue 11, pp 2623–2631 | Cite as

Benign nodules in post-Fontan livers can show imaging features considered diagnostic for hepatocellular carcinoma

  • Michael L. Wells
  • David M. Hough
  • Jeff L. Fidler
  • Patrick S. Kamath
  • Joseph T. Poterucha
  • Sudhakar K. VenkateshEmail author
Article

Abstract

Purpose

To describe the imaging appearance of hyperenhancing nodules arising in post-Fontan patients and to identify specific features best correlated with malignancy.

Methods

Hyperenhancing hepatic nodules visible on CT and/or MRI in post-Fontan patients were identified retrospectively and reviewed by subspecialty radiologists. Nodules with characteristic imaging findings of focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) were defined as typical, the remainder were defined as atypical, described in detail according to LIRADS criteria, and length of stability over time was recorded. Clinical data, alpha fetoprotein levels (AFP), central venous pressures (CVP), and histopathology were recorded.

Results

245 hyperenhancing nodules (215 typical, 30 atypical) were evaluated in 30 patients. Twenty-nine atypical nodules showed washout (portal phase in 6, delayed phase in 29), 0 showed pseudocapsule, 1 showed threshold growth, 1 showed tumor in vein, and 5 showed ancillary features favoring malignancy. Pathology confirmed hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in 3 atypical nodules and FNH-like histology in 3 atypical and 4 typical nodules. 2 atypical nodules were present in a patient with clinical diagnosis of HCC. 20 nodules (7 typical, 13 atypical due to washout) were studied with hepatobiliary contrast agent and all showed homogenous hepatobiliary phase retention. Atypical nodules were significantly more likely to be HCC than biopsy-proven FNH-like or stable ≥24 months when showing portal phase washout (P < 0.001), mosaic architecture (P = 0.020) or in the presence of cirrhosis (P = 0.004) or elevated AFP (P = 0.004). Atypical nodules that were HCC had higher median CVP than those that were FNH-like (19, range 16–27 vs. 13, range 12–16 mmHg, P = 0.0003), there was not a significant difference based on median patient age (HCC 30, range 10–41 vs. FNH-like 40 range 10–41, P = 0.244).

Conclusions

Benign hyperenhancing masses in Fontan patients may demonstrate washout and be mistaken for HCC by imaging criteria. Portal phase washout, mosaic architecture, elevated AFP and higher CVP were associated with HCC in the atypical nodules found in this population.

Keywords

Fontan Heart failure Congestive hepatopathy Focal nodular hyperplasia Hepatocellular carcinoma Washout 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

No funding was received for this study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

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.
    Asrani SK, Asrani NS, Freese DK, et al. (2012) Congenital heart disease and the liver. Hepatology 56(3):1160–1169. doi: 10.1002/hep.25692 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rychik J, Veldtman G, Rand E, et al. (2012) The precarious state of the liver after a Fontan operation: summary of a multidisciplinary symposium. Pediatr Cardiol 33(7):1001–1012. doi: 10.1007/s00246-012-0315-7 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bryant T, Ahmad Z, Millward-Sadler H, et al. (2011) Arterialised hepatic nodules in the Fontan circulation: hepatico-cardiac interactions. Int J Cardiol 151(3):268–272. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2010.05.047 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kendall TJ, Stedman B, Hacking N, et al. (2008) Hepatic fibrosis and cirrhosis in the Fontan circulation: a detailed morphological study. J Clin Pathol 61(4):504–508. doi: 10.1136/jcp.2007.052365 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dai DF, Swanson PE, Krieger EV, et al. (2014) Congestive hepatic fibrosis score: a novel histologic assessment of clinical severity. Mod Pathol 27(12):1552–1558. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2014.79 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bulut OP, Romero R, Mahle WT, et al. (2013) Magnetic resonance imaging identifies unsuspected liver abnormalities in patients after the Fontan procedure. J Pediatr 163(1):201–206. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2012.12.071 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kiesewetter CH, Sheron N, Vettukattill JJ, et al. (2007) Hepatic changes in the failing Fontan circulation. Heart 93(5):579–584. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2006.094516 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wallihan DB, Podberesky DJ (2013) Hepatic pathology after Fontan palliation: spectrum of imaging findings. Pediatr Radiol 43(3):330–338. doi: 10.1007/s00247-012-2531-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Asrani SK, Warnes CA, Kamath PS (2013) Hepatocellular carcinoma after the Fontan procedure. N Engl J Med 368(18):1756–1757. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1214222 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ewe SHT, Ju L (2009) Hepatotocellular carcinoma—a rare complication post Fontan operation. Congenit Heart Dis 4(2):103–106. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-0803.2009.00255.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ghaferi AA, Hutchins GM (2005) Progression of liver pathology in patients undergoing the Fontan procedure: chronic passive congestion, cardiac cirrhosis, hepatic adenoma, and hepatocellular carcinoma. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 129(6):1348–1352. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2004.10.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rajoriya N, Clift P, Thorne S, Hirschfield GM, Ferguson JW (2014) A liver mass post-Fontan operation. QJM 107(7):571–572. doi: 10.1093/qjmed/hcu020 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rosenbaum J, Vrazas J, Lane GK, Hardikar W (2012) Cardiac cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma in a 13-year-old treated with doxorubicin microbead transarterial chemoembolization. J Paediatr Child Health 48(3):E140–E143. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1754.2010.01932.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Saliba T, Dorkhom S, O’Reilly EM, et al. (2010) Hepatocellular carcinoma in two patients with cardiac cirrhosis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 22(7):889–891. doi: 10.1097/MEG.0b013e32832e2bec CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wanless IR (1995) Terminology of nodular hepatocellular lesions. Hepatology 22(3):983–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Josephus Jitta D, Wagenaar LJ, Mulder BJ, et al. (2016) Three cases of hepatocellular carcinoma in Fontan patients: review of the literature and suggestions for hepatic screening. Int J Cardiol 206:21–26. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.12.033 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yamada K, Shinmoto H, Kawamura Y, et al. (2015) Transarterial embolization for pediatric hepatocellular carcinoma with cardiac cirrhosis. Pediatr Int 57(4):766–770. doi: 10.1111/ped.12619 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Elder RW, Parekh S, Book WM (2013) More on hepatocellular carcinoma after the Fontan procedure. N Engl J Med 369(5):490. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1306854 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wells ML, Fenstad ER, Poterucha JT, et al. (2016) Imaging findings of congestive hepatopathy. Radiographics 36(4):1024–1037. doi: 10.1148/rg.2016150207 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Choi JY, Lee HC, Yim JH, et al. (2011) Focal nodular hyperplasia or focal nodular hyperplasia-like lesions of the liver: a special emphasis on diagnosis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 26(6):1004–1009. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2011.06659.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee YH, Kim SH, Cho MY, Shim KY, Kim MS (2007) Focal nodular hyperplasia-like nodules in alcoholic liver cirrhosis: radiologic-pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188(5):W459–W463. doi: 10.2214/AJR.05.1998 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bruix J, Sherman M (2011) Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology 53(3):1020–1022. doi: 10.1002/hep.24199 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Libbrecht L, Cassiman D, Verslype C, et al. (2006) Clinicopathological features of focal nodular hyperplasia-like nodules in 130 cirrhotic explant livers. Am J Gastroenterol 101(10):2341–2346. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00783.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    European Association For The Study Of The L, European Organisation For R, Treatment Of C (2012) EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 56(4):908–943. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2011.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Trevisani F, D’Intino PE, Morselli-Labate AM, et al. (2001) Serum alpha-fetoprotein for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic liver disease: influence of HBsAg and anti-HCV status. J Hepatol 34(4):570–575CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kubota K, Ina H, Okada Y, Irie T (2003) Growth rate of primary single hepatocellular carcinoma: determining optimal screening interval with contrast enhanced computed tomography. Dig Dis Sci 48(3):581–586CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Taouli B, Goh JS, Lu Y, et al. (2005) Growth rate of hepatocellular carcinoma: evaluation with serial computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 29(4):425–429CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Furlan A, Marin D, Agnello F, et al. (2012) Hepatocellular carcinoma presenting at contrast-enhanced multi-detector-row computed tomography or gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging as a small (≤2 cm), indeterminate nodule: growth rate and optimal interval time for imaging follow-up. J Comput Assist Tomogr 36(1):20–25. doi: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e31823ed462 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Varenika V, Fu Y, Maher JJ, et al. (2013) Hepatic fibrosis: evaluation with semiquantitative contrast-enhanced CT. Radiology 266(1):151–158. doi: 10.1148/radiol.12112452 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zissen MH, Wang ZJ, Yee J, et al. (2013) Contrast-enhanced CT quantification of the hepatic fractional extracellular space: correlation with diffuse liver disease severity. AJR Am J Roentgenol 201(6):1204–1210. doi: 10.2214/AJR.12.10039 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bandula S, Punwani S, Rosenberg WM, et al. (2015) Equilibrium contrast-enhanced CT imaging to evaluate hepatic fibrosis: initial validation by comparison with histopathologic sampling. Radiology 275(1):136–143. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14141435 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wells ML, Fenstad ER, Poterucha JT, et al. (2016) Imaging findings of congestive hepatopathy. Radiographics. doi: 10.1148/rg.2016150207 Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    European Association For The Study Of The Liver (2012) EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 56(4):908–943. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2011.12.00 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Choi JY, Lee JM, Sirlin CB (2014) CT and MR imaging diagnosis and staging of hepatocellular carcinoma: part II. Extracellular agents, hepatobiliary agents, and ancillary imaging features. Radiology 273(1):30–50. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14132362 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hope TA, Fowler KJ, Sirlin CB, et al. (2015) Hepatobiliary agents and their role in LI-RADS. Abdom Imaging 40(3):613–625. doi: 10.1007/s00261-014-0227-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Suh YJ, Kim MJ, Choi JY, et al. (2011) Differentiation of hepatic hyperintense lesions seen on gadoxetic acid-enhanced hepatobiliary phase MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197(1):W44–W52. doi: 10.2214/AJR.10.5845 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael L. Wells
    • 1
  • David M. Hough
    • 1
  • Jeff L. Fidler
    • 1
  • Patrick S. Kamath
    • 2
  • Joseph T. Poterucha
    • 3
  • Sudhakar K. Venkatesh
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyMayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  2. 2.Department of GastroenterologyMayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  3. 3.Department of Pediatric CardiologyMayo ClinicRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations