Tomoaki Ichikawa

PURPOSE: To describe imaging findings of early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) at gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, dynamic contrast material-enhanced computed tomography (CT), CT during arterial portography (CTAP), and CT during hepatic arteriography (CTHA) and to compare the diagnostic performance of each modality for small (≤ 2 cm) HCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institute ethics committee deemed study approval unnecessary. One hundred eight resected small lesions in 64 patients were diagnosed as a dysplastic nodule (DN) (n = 12), progressed HCC (n = 66), or early HCC (n = 30). All but two patients underwent all imaging examinations. The imaging characteristics of the lesions with each modality were determined. To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the modalities, two radiologists graded the presence of HCC with use of a five-point confidence scale. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (A(z)), sensitivity, and specificity of each modality were compared. RESULTS: The imaging features that are statistically significant for differentiating an early HCC from a DN include fat-containing lesions at dual-echo T1-weighted MR imaging (seen in 16 of the 30 early HCCs and none of the DNs), low attenuation at unenhanced CT (seen in 13 of the 30 early HCCs and none of the DNs), low attenuation at CTAP (seen in 11 of the 30 early HCCs and none of the DNs), and low signal intensity at hepatocyte phase gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging (seen in 29 of the 30 early HCCs and none of the DNs). The diagnostic performance of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging (A(z), 0.98 and 0.99) was significantly greater than that of contrast-enhanced CT (A(z), 0.87) and CTHA-CTAP (A(z), 0.85 and 0.86) owing to its significantly higher sensitivity (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging is the most useful imaging technique for evaluating small HCC, including early HCC.

Hepatocellular adenoma is a rare benign lesion that is most often seen in young women with a history of oral contraceptive use. It is typically solitary, although multiple lesions have been reported, particularly in patients with glycogen storage disease and liver adenomatosis. Because of the risk of hemorrhage and malignant transformation, hepatocellular adenomas must be identified and treated promptly. At pathologic analysis, hepatocellular adenoma is usually a well-circumscribed, nonlobulated lesion, and at gross examination, resected adenomas frequently demonstrate areas of hemorrhage and infarction. Most adenomas are not specifically diagnosed at ultrasonography (US) and are usually further evaluated with computed tomography (CT) or other imaging modalities. Color Doppler US may help differentiate hepatocellular adenoma from focal nodular hyperplasia. Multiphasic helical CT allows more accurate detection and characterization of focal hepatic lesions. Hepatocellular adenomas are typically bright on T1-weighted magnetic resonance images and predominantly hyperintense relative to liver on T2-weighted images. The prognosis of hepatic adenoma is not well established. Criteria that guide treatment include the number and size of the lesions, the presence of symptoms, and the surgical risk incurred by the patient. Understanding the imaging appearance of hepatocellular adenoma can help avoid misdiagnosis and facilitate prompt, effective treatment.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the usefulness of diffusion-weighted MR imaging with single-shot echoplanar imaging in characterizing focal hepatic lesions by apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Diffusion-weighted imaging on a 1.5-T MR unit was performed in 46 patients with 74 known focal hepatic lesions (11 hemangiomas, 15 metastases, and 48 hepatocellular carcinomas [HCCs]). Mean values for ADCs and CNRs of all lesions were calculated. Mean values for CNRs with diffusion-weighted imaging were also compared with those for breath-hold T2-weighted fast spin-echo images. RESULTS: The mean values for ADCs were different for each type of tumor (5.39 x 10(-3) mm2/sec +/- 1.23 in hemangiomas, 2.85 x 10(-3) mm2/sec +/- 0.59 in metastases, and 3.84 x 10(-3) mm2/sec +/- 0.92 in HCCs), and each of them was significantly greater than the mean values for ADCs of the normal liver (2.28 x 10(-3) mm2/sec +/- 1.23 in normal liver [p < .05] except metastasis versus normal liver [p < .1]). Also, the mean values for ADCs were based on differences of ADC values. Only four (6%) of 63 malignant tumors (three HCCs and one metastasis) could not be differentiated from hemangiomas. The mean value for CNRs with diffusion-weighted images (14.4 +/- 8.54 in HCC and 29.0 +/- 6.79 in metastasis) was significantly higher than the mean values for CNRs obtained with T2-weighted fast spin-echo images in both metastases and HCCs (p < .05), whereas no significant difference was seen for hemangiomas. CONCLUSION: Mean values for ADCs differed for the three types of the hepatic lesions and were higher than ADCs of the normal liver. We suggest that diffusion-weighted imaging may be useful for increased detection of HCCs and metastases and in distinguishing these entities from hemangiomas.

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of biphasic computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the detection of pancreatic islet cell tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective quantitative, qualitative, and receiver operating characteristic analyses of biphasic CT and MR imaging were performed in 19 patients with 26 histopathologically proved islet cell tumors. Delayed arterial dominant-phase (AP) and portal venous-phase (PVP) biphasic CT was performed after the administration of contrast material. MR imaging included T1-weighted spin-echo (SE) and T2-weighted SE or fast SE imaging, fat-saturated T1-weighted SE imaging, dynamic contrast material-enhanced T1-weighted gradient-echo imaging, and delayed enhanced T1-weighted SE imaging with or without fat saturation. RESULTS: PVP CT and delayed enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging had the highest A(z) values (0.98 and 0.97, respectively; P <.05). Delayed enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging had the highest relative sensitivity (14-15 [74%-79%] of 19 lesions), followed by PVP CT (18-19 [69%-73%] of 26 lesions), AP CT (17-19 [65%-73%] of 26 lesions), fat-saturated T1-weighted MR imaging (eight to 10 [57%-71%] of 14 lesions), T2-weighted (16-17 [62%-65%] of 26 lesions), T1-weighted (15-18 [58%-69%] of 26 lesions) MR imaging, and dynamic MR imaging (nine [56%] of 16 lesions). CONCLUSION: Biphasic (especially PVP) CT and MR imaging have similar effectiveness in the detection of islet cell tumors if fat-saturated T1-weighted and delayed enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging are included.

PURPOSE: To define the duct-penetrating sign at magnetic resonance (MR) cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and to assess the usefulness of this sign for distinguishing an inflammatory pancreatic mass (IPM) from a conventional pancreatic carcinoma (CPC) compared with arterial phase computed tomography (hereafter, CT) and arterial phase MR imaging (hereafter, MR imaging). MATERIALS AND METHODS: MRCP, CT, and MR images were compared by means of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis for 11 IPMs and 43 CPCs. With the MRCP images, a morphologic classification of the main pancreatic duct (MPD) was attempted for all lesions. On the basis of this classification and the enhancement patterns of a lesion, all readers graded the presence of IPM or CPC on a five-point scale for all images. RESULTS: On the MRCP images, the morphologic characteristics of the MPD were nonobstruction for IPM (28 of 33, 85%) and obstruction or irregular stenosis for CPC (124 of 129, 96%). At ROC analysis among all the techniques, MRCP images had the highest value (0.98) for significant areas under the ROC curve (CT, 0.84; MR, 0.76) (P <.001). For the duct-penetrating sign in the broad sense (nonobstructed MPD) and the sign in the narrow sense (only normal MPD), the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for diagnosis of IPM were 85%, 96%, and 94%, respectively, and 36%, 100%, and 87%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The duct-penetrating sign on MRCP images was more helpful to distinguish IPM from CPC than were the enhancement patterns on CT and MR images.