Skip to main content

The utility of diffusion-weighted imaging in improving the sensitivity of LI-RADS classification of small hepatic observations suspected of malignancy

Abdominal Radiology volume 44, pages 1773–1784 (2019)Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

We investigated the added value of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI)/apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in the categorization of small hepatic observation (≤ 20 mm) detected in patients with chronic liver disease in reference to LI-RADS (liver imaging reporting and data system) classification system.

Methods

We prospectively evaluated 165 patients with chronic liver disease with small hepatic observations (≤ 20 mm) which were previously categorized as LI-RADS grade 3–5 on dynamic contrast-enhanced CT (DCE-CT). All patients were submitted to a functional MRI including DCE and DWI. Using LI-RADS v2017, two radiologists independently evaluated the observations and assigned a LI-RADS category to each observation using DCE-MRI alone and combined DCE-MRI and DWI/ADC. In the combined technique, the radiologists assigned a LI-RADS category based on a modified LI-RADS criteria in which restricted diffusion on DWI was considered a major feature of HCC. We evaluated the inter-reader agreement with Kappa statistics and compared the diagnostic performance of the LI-RADS with two imaging techniques by Fisher’s exact test using histopathology as the reference standard.

Results

Combined technique in LI-RADS yielded better sensitivities (reader 1, 97% [65/67]; reader 2, 95.5% [64/67]) for HCC diagnosis than DCE-MRI alone (reader 1, 80.6% [54/67], p = 0.005; reader 2, 83.6% [56/67], p = 0.04). The specificities were insignificantly lower in combined technique (reader 1, 88.4% [107/121]; reader 2, 77.7% [94/121]) than in DCE-MRI alone (reader 1, 90.9% [110/121], p = 0.67; reader 2, 79.3% [96/121], p = 0.88). The inter-reader agreement of the LI-RADS scores between combined technique and DCE-MRI was good (κ = 0.765).

Conclusion

The use of DWI/ADC as an additional major criterion, improved the sensitivity of LI-RADS in the diagnosis of HCC while keeping high specificity.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. Bruix J, Sherman M (2011) Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology 53:1020–1022.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Kudo M, Matsui O, Izumi N, et al (2014) JSH consensus-based clinical practice guidelines for the management of hepatocellular carcinoma: 2014 update by the liver Cancer Study Group of Japan. Liver Cancer 3:458–468.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. European Association For The Study Of The Liver (2012) EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 56: 908–943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. American College of Radiology (2014) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2014. Reston: American College of Radiology.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cruite I, Tang A, Sirlin CB (2013) Imaging-based diagnostic systems for hepatocellular carcinoma. AJR 201:41–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Patella F, Pesapane F, Fumarola EM, et al (2018) CT-MRI LI-RADS v2017: A Comprehensive Guide for Beginners. Journal of Clinical and Translational Hepatology 6:1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. An C, Rakhmonova G, Choi JY, Kim MJ (2016) Liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) version 2014: understanding and application of the diagnostic algorithm. Clin Mol Hepatol 22:296–307.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Fusco R, Sansone M, Petrillo A (2015) The Use of the Levenberg-Marquardt and Variable Projection Curve-Fitting Algorithm in Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Method for DW-MRI Data Analysis. Appl Magn Reson 46:551–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Taouli B, Koh DM (2010) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of the liver. Radiology 254:47–66

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Galea N, Cantisani V, Taouli B (2013) Liver lesion detection and characterization: role of diffusionweighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 37:1260–1276.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Koh DM, Collins DJ (2007) Diffusion-weighted MRI in the body: applications and challenges in oncology. AJR 188:1622–1635.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vandecaveye V, De Keyzer F, Verslype C, et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted MRI provides additional value to conventional dynamic contrast enhanced MRI for detection of hepatocellular carcinoma. European Radiology 19:2456–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Xu PJ, Yan FH, Wang JH, et al (2010) Contribution of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the characterization of hepatocellular carcinomas and dysplastic nodules in cirrhotic liver. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 34:506–512.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Cha DI, Jang KM, Kim SH, Kang TW, Song KD (2017). Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System on CT and gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging. European radiology 27:4394-4405.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hicks RM, Yee J, Ohliger MA, et al (2016) Comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and T2-weighted single shot fast spin-echo: Implications for LI-RADS characterization of hepatocellular carcinoma. Magnetic resonance imaging 34:915–921.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Piana G, Trinquart L, Meskine N, et al (2011) New MR imaging criteria with a diffusion-weighted sequence for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic liver diseases. J Hepatol 55:126–132.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Xu PJ, Yan FH, Wang JH, Lin J, Ji Y (2009) Added value of breath hold diffusion‐weighted MRI in detection of small hepatocellular carcinoma lesions compared with dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI alone using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Journal of magnetic resonance imaging 29:341–349.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wu LM, Xu JR, Lu Q, Hua J, Chen J, Hu J (2013) A pooled analysis of diffusion‐weighted imaging in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic liver diseases. Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology 28:227–234.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Parikh T, Drew SJ, Lee VS, et al (2008) Focal liver lesion detection and characterization with diffusion-weighted MR imaging: comparison with standard breath-hold T2-weighted imaging. Radiology 246:812–822.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hecht EM, Holland AE, Israel GM, et al (2006) Hepatocellular carcinoma in the cirrhotic liver: gadolinium-enhanced 3D T1-weighted MR imaging as a stand-alone sequence for diagnosis. Radiology 239:438–447.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim YK, Lee YH, Kim CS, Han YM (2008) Added diagnostic value of T2-weighted MR imaging to gadolinium-enhanced three-dimensional dynamic MR imaging for the detection of small hepatocellular carcinomas. Eur J Radiol 67:304–310.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Nasu K, Kuroki Y, Tsukamoto T, Nakajima H, Mori K, Minami M (2009) Diffusion-weighted imaging of surgically resected hepatocellular carcinoma: imaging characteristics and relationship among signal intensity, apparent diffusion coefficient, and histopathologic grade. AJR 193:438–444.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Muhi A, Ichikawa T, Motosugi U, et al (2009) High b-value diffusion weighted MR imaging of hepatocellular lesions: estimation of grade of malignancy of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Magn Reson Imaging 30:1005–1011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Padhani AR, Liu G, Koh DM, et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: consensus and recommendations. Neoplasia 11:102–125.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Ichikawa T, Haradome H, Hachiya J, et al (1999) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging with single-shot echo-planar imaging in the upper abdomen: preliminary clinical experience in 61 patients. Abdom Imaging 24:456–461.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kele PG, van der Jagt EJ (2010) Diffusion weighted imaging in the liver. World J Gastroenterol 16:1567–1576

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Fowler KJ, Brown JJ, Narra VR (2011) Magnetic resonance imaging of focal liver lesions: approach to imaging diagnosis. Hepatology 54: 2227–2237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Shankar S, Kalra N, Bhatia A, et al (2016) Role of diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) detection and its grading on 3T MRI: a prospective study. Journal of clinical and experimental hepatology 6:303–310.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Maiwald B, Lobsien D, Kahn T, Stumpp P (2014) Is 3-Tesla Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging superior to 64-slice contrast-enhanced CT for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma? PloS one, 9 (11), e111935.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Inchingolo R, De Gaetano AM, Curione D, et al (2015) Role of diffusion-weighted imaging, apparent diffusion coefficient and correlation with hepatobiliary phase findings in the differentiation of hepatocellular carcinoma from dysplastic nodules in cirrhotic liver. European radiology 25:1087–1096.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Suh YJ, Kim MJ, Choi JY, et al (2012) Preoperative prediction of the microvascular invasion of hepatocellular carcinoma with diffusion-weighted imaging. Liver Transplantation 18:1171–1178.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Xu P, Zeng M, Liu K, et al (2014) Microvascular invasion in small hepatocellular carcinoma: is it predictable with preoperative diffusion-weighted imaging. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 29:330–336.

  33. Okamura S, Sumie S, Tonan T, et al (2016) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging predicts malignant potential in small hepatocellular carcinoma. Digestive and Liver Disease 48:945–952.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all staff members and colleagues in the Radiology Department-Zagazig University for their helpful cooperation and all the study participants for their patience and support.

Funding

The authors state that this work has not received any funding.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiodiagnosis, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt

    Mohammad Abd Alkhalik Basha, Faten Fawzy Mohammad, Mai E. M. Khamis, Ahmed Mohamed El-Maghraby, Ahmed A. El Sammak, Rania M. Al-Molla, Heba A. E. Mohamed, Ahmad Abdullah Alnaggar, Hanan Abdelhameed Hassan, Taghreed M. Azmy, Ahmed M. Alaa Eldin, Mostafa Mohamad Assy, Mohamad Zakarya AlAzzazy, Khaled Mohamed Altaher, Heba Fathy Tantawy, Sameh Saber, Mohamed I. Amin, Ahmed Mohamed Alsowey & Mohamed Hesham Saleh Radwan

  2. Department of Radiodiagnosis, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt

    Rania Refaat

  3. Department of Medical Oncology, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt

    Heba F. Taha

  4. Department of Tropical Medicine, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt

    Talaat Fathy

  5. Department of Internal MEDICINE, Hepatology Division, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt

    Amr Shaaban Hanafy

  6. Department of Pathology, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt

    Eman H. Abdelbary

Authors
  1. Mohammad Abd Alkhalik Basha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rania Refaat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Faten Fawzy Mohammad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mai E. M. Khamis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ahmed Mohamed El-Maghraby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ahmed A. El Sammak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Rania M. Al-Molla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Heba A. E. Mohamed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Ahmad Abdullah Alnaggar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Hanan Abdelhameed Hassan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Taghreed M. Azmy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Ahmed M. Alaa Eldin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Mostafa Mohamad Assy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Mohamad Zakarya AlAzzazy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Khaled Mohamed Altaher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Heba Fathy Tantawy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Sameh Saber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Mohamed I. Amin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Ahmed Mohamed Alsowey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Mohamed Hesham Saleh Radwan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Heba F. Taha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Talaat Fathy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  23. Amr Shaaban Hanafy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  24. Eman H. Abdelbary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Abd Alkhalik Basha.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relevant conflicts of interest, and no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Ethical approval

Institutional review board approval was obtained.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all patients.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Basha, M.A.A., Refaat, R., Mohammad, F.F. et al. The utility of diffusion-weighted imaging in improving the sensitivity of LI-RADS classification of small hepatic observations suspected of malignancy. Abdom Radiol 44, 1773–1784 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-01887-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-01887-z

Keywords

  • LI-RADS
  • Perfusion MRI
  • DWI
  • Hepatocellular Carcinoma