超声造影LI-RADS鉴别诊断最大径≤3cm肝脏局灶性病变的临床价值

目的 探究超声造影肝脏影像报告和数据管理系统(CEUS LI-RADS)在诊断病灶直径≤3cm的肝脏局灶性病变(FLLs)性质中的临床价值。方法 以2019年7月~2022年11月82例肝脏局灶性病变患者为研究对象,患者同时接受常规超声及超声造影检查。以病理学检查结果为参考标准,分析CEUS LI-RADS及常规超声对良恶性FLLs的诊断价值,并比较CEUS LI-RADS对不同直径FLLs的诊断准确率。结果 经病理学检查显示,82例FLLs患者中包括良性病变3例(肝非典型性孤立性纤维肿瘤2例、肝血管瘤1例)、恶性病变79例(肝细胞癌(HCC)40例、胆管细胞癌14例、转移癌23例、多形性横纹肌肉瘤1例、上皮样血管肉瘤1例)；LI-RADS诊断FLLs的准确率为90.24%(74/82)；CEUS LI-RADS与病理学检查结果的一致性(kappa=0.553)高于常规超声(Kappa=0.266)；CEUS LI-RADS诊断肝脏良恶性病变的AUC大于常规超声(P<0.05)；CEUS LI-RADS诊断直径2~3cm 、1~<2cm及<1cm FLLs的准确率分别为94.74%(36/38)、91.18%(31/34)、70.00%(7/10),其诊断直径2~3cm FLLs的准确率高于直径<1cm FLLs(χ₂^=5.191,P=0.023)。结论 CEUS LI-RADS可用于判断FLLs恶性概率,且LI-RADS LR-5类对恶性FLLs具有诊断价值。     

超声造影肝脏影像数据和报告系统分类与肝细胞癌分化程度及Ki-67指数的相关性分析

目的探讨不同超声造影(CEUS)肝脏影像数据和报告系统(LI-RADS)类别与肝细胞癌(HCC)分化程度及Ki-67指数相关性。方法采用回顾性病例研究, 纳入分析中国CEUS数据库中2017年12月至2020年12月共208例HCC患者(208个病灶)的临床和影像学资料, 根据美国放射学会提出的CEUS LI-RADS(V2017)对病灶分类。以组织病理学诊断结果为金标准, 评估HCC的分化程度及Ki-67指数在CEUS LI-RADS不同类别中分布是否存在差异, 并采用Kendall′s tau-b相关系数检验分析CEUS LI-RADS类别与肿瘤分化程度及Ki-67指数的相关性。结果不同CEUS LI-RADS类别的HCC之间分化程度及Ki-67指数的分布差异有统计学意义(P<0.001, P=0.009), CEUS LI-RADS M类HCC更容易呈低分化且表现出更高的Ki-67指数。CEUS LI-RADS类别与肿瘤分化程度呈负相关(tau-b=-0.250, P<0.001), 与Ki-67指数呈正相关(tau-b=0.178, P=0.002), 即CEUS ...     

超声造影LI－RADS 2017版与MRI LI－RADS 2018版对肝内局灶性病变恶性风险的预测价值

目的比较超声造影(CEUS)肝脏影像报告与数据系统(LI-RADS)2017版(v2017)和磁共振成像(MRI) LI-RADS 2018版(v2018)单独以及联合应用对肝细胞癌(HCC)高危患者肝内局灶性病变(FLL)恶性风险的预测价值。方法对2018年1月至2021年10月于上海交通大学医学院附属瑞金医院及瑞金医院无锡分院同时行CEUS和增强MRI检查的212例患者300个FLL的临床和影像学资料进行回顾性分析, 入组结节均根据CEUS LI-RADS v2017和CT/MRI LI-RADS v2018分类标准进行分类, 对2种影像学LI-RADS分类结果行Cohen′s Kappa检验。以组织病理学诊断或随访结果为金标准, 比较2种影像学LI-RADS分类标准单独以及联合应用对FLL的恶性风险预测价值。结果 CEUS LI-RADS v2017和MRI LI-RADS v2018两种影像学分类标准间总体一致性中等(Kappa=0.441)。CEUS LR-5和MRI LR-5单独应用以及联合应用诊断HCC的特异性分别为93.66%、95.07%、88.73%(P>0....     

美国放射学院超声造影LI-RADS指南(2016版)

正指南形成的时间节点2014年4月美国放射学院对比增强超声肝脏影像学报告及数据系统(ACR CEUS LI-RADS)工作组成立,2015年11月至2016年3月先后经北美放射学会2015年教学展示、美国超声医学会2016年口头报告及2016年壁报,工作组于2016年5月将超声造影(CEUS)LI-RADS最终版(2016版)工作流程提交至指导委员会,2016年6月24日指导委员会正式通过该工作流程,并公开发布。     

ACR CEUS LI-RADS和WFUMB-EFSUMB标准对高危人群肝细胞癌诊断价值的对比研究

目的比较美国放射学会超声造影肝脏影像报告和数据系统（ACR CEUS LI-RADS）和世界超声医学和生物学联合会-欧洲超声医学和生物学联合会（WFUMB-EFSUMB）肝脏超声造影指南对于高危人群肝细胞癌（HCC）的诊断效能。 方法回顾性分析2018年3月至2020年12月在浙江大学医学院附属第二医院就诊的HCC高危患者319例（334个病灶）,按照ACR CEUS LI-RADS 2017版和WFUMB-EFSUMB肝脏造影指南分类标准对334个病灶的超声造影视频进行判读,以手术或穿刺活检组织学病理、临床诊断及随访结果为参考标准,分析ACR CEUS LI-RADS各分级类别对HCC的诊断效能。分别计算ACR CEUS LI-RADS LR-5类和WFUMB-EFSUMB标准诊断HCC的敏感度、特异度、准确性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值及受试者操作特征（ROC）曲线下面积,采用χ²检验及DeLong's检验进行诊断效能比较。计算两者联合诊断HCC的ROC曲线下面积,并分别与2种诊断标准的ROC曲线下面积进行比较。 结果本研究纳入的334个肝脏病灶,按照ACR CEUS LI-RADS分类,LR-5类病灶114个,LR-4类病灶25个,LR-3类病灶12个,LR-M类病灶162个,每个分类诊断HCC的阳性预测值分别为93.9%、40.0%、16.7%、24.7%。ACR CEUS LI-RADS LR-5类标准与WFUMB-EFSUMB标准诊断HCC的敏感度分别为66.9%、83.8%,特异度分别为96.0%、73.0%,差异均具有统计学意义（χ²=25.037、38.025,P均＜0.001）;2种标准诊断准确性比较（82.0% vs 78.1%）,差异无统计学意义（χ²=1.352,P=0.245）;2种标准诊断HCC的ROC曲线下面积分别为0.814、0.784,差异无统计学意义（P=0.161）。两者联合诊断的ROC曲线下面积为0.857,与ACR CEUS LI-RADS LR-5类及WFUMB-EFSUMB标准比较,差异具有统计学意义（P=0.001、＜0.001）。 结论ACR CEUS LI-RADS和WFUMB-EFSUMB标准对高危人群HCC的诊断均具有较高的价值。ACR CEUS LI-RADS LR-5类标准和WFUMB-EFSUMB标准诊断HCC的效能类似。然而,2种标准在提供诊断信息时存在差异,ACR CEUS LI-RADS LR-5类标准的诊断特异度更高,而WFUMB-EFSUMB标准的诊断敏感度更高,2种标准在一定程度上可以互补。     

超声造影肝脏影像报告与数据系统对甲胎蛋白阴性患者肝脏局灶性病变恶性风险的预测价值

目的 探讨超声造影肝脏影像报告与数据系统2017版（CEUS LI-RADS v2017）对甲胎蛋白（AFP）阴性患者肝脏局灶性病变（FLL）恶性风险的预测价值。方法 选取我院行CEUS检查的108例AFP阴性FLL患者的134个结节,其中肝细胞癌（HCC）52个,非HCC恶性肿瘤（OM）22个,良性病灶60个。采用CEUS LI-RADS v2017对结节进行分类,以组织病理学结果或增强影像学检查和临床随访结果为金标准,计算CEUS LI-RADS v2017对AFP阴性患者FLL恶性风险的预测效能;绘制受试者工作特征曲线分析其曲线下面积（AUC）。结果 LR-5与LR-4、5诊断AFP阴性HCC的敏感性、特异性分别为73.08%和88.46%、93.90%和82.93%,差异均有统计学意义（均P<0.05）;AUC分别为0.84和0.86,二者比较差异无统计学意义。LR-M诊断OM的敏感性、特异性和AUC分别为90.91%、97.32%和0.94。结论 CEUS LI-RADS v2017对AFP阴性患者FLL恶性风险有一定的预测价值;其中LR-5预测HCC的特异性高而敏感性...     

超声造影LI-RADS分类标准对混合型肝癌诊断价值的初步探讨

目的回顾性分析混合型肝癌(cHCC-CC)的超声造影(CEUS)表现,并对CEUS肝脏影像和报告系统(LI-RADS)判定cHCC-CC分类的价值进行初步探讨。方法经病理诊断为cHCC-CC且具备CEUS检查结果的44例患者为研究对象。总结cHCC-CC的CEUS表现,并依据CEUS LI-RADS (2017版)对局灶性肝脏病变进行分类,其中LR-5为明确诊断HCC,LR-M为非HCC的肝内恶性病灶。结果 cHCC-CC CEUS动脉期31灶(70.5%)呈高增强,11灶(25%)呈周边环状强化,2灶(4.5%)呈等增强;平均开始廓清时间为(67.3±48.4)s,其中30灶(68.1%)60s内廓清,9灶(20.5%)61～120s内廓清,5灶(11.4%)120s廓清。34灶判定为LR-M,8灶为LR-5,2灶为LR-4。判定为LR-5的8灶中有1例患者单独CA-199升高,2例患者AFP和CA-199同时升高,1例胆管扩张;6例患者动脉期强化不均匀,1例患者病灶强化范围边界不清。结论 cHCC-CC的CEUS模式可呈高增强和周边环状强化,部分病灶LR-RADAS有被判定为HCC的可能,需结合其他征象综合判断。     

肝脏病灶大小及肝细胞癌分化程度对超声造影肝脏影像报告与数据管理系统分类诊断的影响北大核心CSCD

目的分析肝脏病灶大小和肝细胞癌(HCC)分化程度对超声造影肝脏影像报告与数据管理系统(CEUS LI-RADS)分类诊断的影响。方法回顾性分析698例接受超声造影(CEUS)的肝脏局灶性病变(FLL)患者,根据肝脏病灶最大径(T)分为T<3 cm、3 cm≤T<5 cm和T≥5 cm组;根据HCC分化程度将其分为高、中及低分化组。观察不同大小肝脏病灶、不同分化程度HCC间CEUS LI-RADS分类的差异;以病理诊断为金标准,计算CEUS LI-RADS分类诊断不同大小HCC(以LR-5类为HCC)的效能。结果698例中,恶性682例,包括599例HCC及83例其他恶性病变,良性病变16例;其中T<3 cm 182例,3 cm≤T<5 cm 208例,T≥5 cm组308例;HCC中,高分化组32例,中分化组346例,低分化组221例。T<3 cm、3 cm≤T<5 cm和T≥5 cm病灶中,根据最终病理诊断,LR-1类均为良性病变,LR-4类中HCC占比依次为85.71%(18/21)、100%(10/10)及100%(2/2);HCC在LR-5类中的占比依次为98.37%(121/123)、95.36%(144/151)及94.50%(206/218),在LR-M类中的占比依次为54.55%(18/33)、39.13%(18/46)及69.77%(60/86)。高、中、低分化HCC组中,LR-5类占比分别为78.13%(25/32)、81.79%(283/346)和73.76%(163/221);LR-M类在低分化HCC组中的占比高于高、中分化组(P均<0.05)。以LR-5类为标准诊断HCC,CEUS LI-RADS针对T<3 cm、3 cm≤T<5 cm和T≥5 cm病灶分类诊断HCC的敏感度分别为76.10%(121/159)、83.72%(144/172)和76.87%(206/268),特异度分别为91.30%(21/23)、80.56%(29/36)和70.00%(28/40)。结论肝脏病灶大小及HCC分化程度均对CEUS LI-RADS分类诊断具有一定影响。     

超声造影在肝局灶性病变诊疗中的应用进展

超声检查被多国肝病指南推荐作为肝脏肿瘤早期筛查监测手段。基于常规超声的超声造影（contrast-enhanced ultrasound,CEUS）可以提供组织微循环灌注等方面的功能学相关信息,且较增强CT/MRI而言,具有实时、连续、动态、无放射性损伤等优势,其所用超声对比剂微泡经肺排泄,无心肾甲状腺毒性,适用于肾功能不全患者,过敏反应发生率极低。CEUS被多项国内和国际指南推荐作为诊断及鉴别肝脏局灶性病变（focal liver lesion,FLL）的一线增强影像学检查方式。相较于常规超声,CEUS可大幅度提高FLL病灶检出率和诊断及鉴别诊断能力。美国放射学院（American College of Radiology,ACR）发布的超声造影肝脏影像报告及数据系统（Liver Imaging Reporting And Data System,LI-RADS）可用于高危人群肝内病变全谱的描述及FLL危险程度分层和临床处理策略的推荐。在介入方面,CEUS有助于优化FLL穿刺活检路径和靶目标识别,提高穿刺成功率和标本阳性率,并应用于消融术中引导、即刻评估、长期疗效评估和术后随访等。除...     

超声造影肝脏影像报告与数据系统在甲胎蛋白阴性肝细胞癌高危患者中的应用

目的 研究超声造影肝脏影像报告与数据系统2017版（CEUS LI-RADS v2017）在甲胎蛋白（AFP）阴性的肝细胞癌（HCC）高危患者肝局灶性病变中的应用价值。方法 回顾性分析2018年1月至2021年10月在我院行CEUS检查的AFP阴性HCC高危患者108例（134个结节）,采用CEUS LI-RADS v2017对结节进行分类,以组织病理学结果或增强影像学检查和随访结果为金标准,计算CEUS LI-RADS对AFP阴性患者HCC和肝内其他恶性肿瘤（OM）的诊断敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值、准确率、受试者工作特征曲线下面积（AUC）。结果 AFP阴性HCC较OM小（P＜0.001）。CEUS LR-5类、LR-4类、LR-3类对AFP阴性HCC的阳性预测值分别为88.37%、47.06%、12.9%。LR-5类诊断AFP阴性HCC的敏感性、特异性、准确率和AUC分别为73.07%、 93.90%、85.82%和0.87。LR-M类诊断OM的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值、准确率和AUC分别为90.91%、97.32%、86.96%、98.20%、96.27%和0.94。结论AFP阴性HCC较OM小,CEUS LI-RADS v2017对AFP阴性HCC诊断特异性较高而敏感性较低,对OM有较好的诊断价值。     

Interobserver agreement for contrast-enhanced ultrasound of liver imaging reporting and data system: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUNDHepatocellular carcinoma is the most common primary liver malignancy. From the results of previous studies, Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) on contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has shown satisfactory diagnostic value. However, a unified conclusion on the interobserver stability of this innovative ultrasound imaging has not been determined. The present meta-analysis examined the interobserver agreement of CEUS LI-RADS to provide some reference for subsequent related research.AIMTo evaluate the interobserver agreement of LI-RADS on CEUS and analyze the sources of heterogeneity between studies.METHODSRelevant papers on the subject of interobserver agreement on CEUS LI-RADS published before March 1, 2020 in China and other countries were analyzed. The studies were filtered, and the diagnostic criteria were evaluated. The selected references were analyzed using the “meta” and “metafor” packages of R software version 3.6.2.RESULTSEight studies were ultimately included in the present analysis. Meta-analysis results revealed that the summary Kappa value of included studies was 0.76 [95% confidence interval, 0.67-0.83], which shows substantial agreement. Higgins I² statistics also confirmed the substantial heterogeneity (I² = 91.30%, 95% confidence interval, 85.3%-94.9%, P < 0.01). Meta-regression identified the variables, including the method of patient enrollment, method of consistency testing, and patient race, which explained the substantial study heterogeneity.CONCLUSIONCEUS LI-RADS demonstrated overall substantial interobserver agreement, but heterogeneous results between studies were also obvious. Further clinical investigations should consider a modified recommendation about the experimental design.     

Comparison of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound versus Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Diagnosis of Focal Liver Lesions Using the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System

The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) categorization of focal liver lesions (FLLs) on contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in comparison with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI). A total of 63 patients with 84 FLLs were included in the final study population, after review of the electronic medical records and clinical data. Two trained radiologists evaluated all CEUS and CE-MRI images independently. They assigned a LI-RADS category to each FLL and assessed major features based on CEUS LI-RADS Version 2017 and computed tomography/MRI LI-RADS Version 2018. The generalized estimating equation method was used to compare the diagnostic performance of the LI-RADS algorithm between CEUS and CE-MRI. The sensitivity of LR-5/LR-TIV (tumor in vein) categories for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) differed significantly between CEUS and CE-MRI (88.9% [40/45], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 76.5%–95.2%), versus 64.4% (29/45; 95% CI: 49.8%–76.8%), p = 0.006; 82.2% (37/45; 95% CI: 68.7%–90.7%), versus 62.2% (28/45; 95% CI: 47.6%–74.9%), p = 0.034. Inter-observer agreement was substantial for assigning LR-5 on both CEUS and CE-MRI. For both reviewers, there was a higher frequency of LR-5 (44.0% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.009; 42.9% vs. 26.2%, p = 0.023) in CEUS compared with CE-MRI. Arterial phase hyper-enhancement (APHE) was less frequently observed on CEUS than on CE-MRI (46.4% vs. 61.9%, p = 0.044). However, the washout appearance was observed more frequently on CEUS than on CE-MRI (50.0% vs. 28.6%, p = 0.004). Inter-observer agreement between the two reviewers on APHE and washout appearance was excellent for both CEUS and CE-MRI. These findings suggest that CEUS had a much higher sensitivity than CE-MRI in the diagnosis of HCC using LI-RADS, and although the frequencies of major features differed, inter-observer agreement between the two reviewers on major features of HCC was excellent for both CEUS and CE-MRI.     

MR versus CEUS LI-RADS for Distinguishing Hepatocellular Carcinoma from other Hepatic Malignancies in High-Risk Patients

Distinguishing between other hepatic malignancies (OMs) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is vital to allow clinicians to determine optimal treatment and assess prognosis in patients at high risk for HCC. This study evaluated the performance of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) versus contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) for differentiating HCC from OMs in patients at high risk for HCC. This retrospective study consecutively enrolled 106 high-risk patients with HCC and 52 high-risk patients with OMs. Patients underwent both MRI and CEUS, with histologic diagnosis as a reference standard. The diagnostic performance of MR versus CEUS LI-RADS was calculated and compared. The performance of the modified CEUS LI-RADS criteria was also evaluated and compared. Our research found that MRI features significantly differed between patients with OMs and those with HCC (p < 0.05), with sensitivities of 34.6%–69.2% and specificities of 83.0%–95.3% for diagnosing OMs and an LI-RADS M (LR-M): definite or probable malignancy, not specific for hepatocellular carcinoma sensitivity of 90.4% and specificity of 83.0% for diagnosing OM. CEUS features also significantly differed between patients with OM and HCC (p < 0.05), with sensitivities of 11.5%–96.2% and specificities of 23.6%–100% for diagnosing OMs, and an LR-M sensitivity of 98.1% and specificity of 84.0% for diagnosing OMs. Accuracies of category LR-M did not significantly differ between MR and CEUS LI-RADS (85.4% vs. 88.6%, p = 0.724). After reclassification of category LR-M nodules to category LR-5 if they exhibited clear intratumoral non-enhanced area boundaries and no punched-out appearance before 5 min, accuracy increased from 88.6% to 96.8% for CEUS LR-M and from 84.8% to 91.1% for CEUS LR-5. LR-M accuracies were significantly higher for the modified version of the CEUS LI-RADS than for MR LI-RADS (96.8% vs. 85.4%, respectively, p = 0.04). CEUS LI-RADS and MR LI-RADS can effectively be used to distinguish HCC from OMs. In patients at high risk of HCC, performance may be further improved by using a modified CEUS LI-RADS classification system in which category LR-M lesions are considered LR-5 if they have clear intratumoral non-enhanced area boundaries and do not have a punched-out appearance.     

Impact of Revision of the LR-M Criteria on the Diagnostic Performance of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound LI-RADS

This study was aimed at revising the LI-RADS M category (LR-M) criteria to improve the diagnostic performance categories LR-5 and LR-M of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) Version 2017. We enrolled 264 patients (264 nodules) with a risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The nodules were assigned specific CEUS LI-RADS categories. Washout onset times for all nodules were noted. The diagnostic performance of LR-5 and LR-M was analyzed based on the different early washout criterion for the LR-M category. The positive predictive values in LR-5, LR-4 and LR-3 were 98.6%, 72.2% and 16.7%, respectively, and that for non-HCC malignancies in LR-M was 25.0%. Patients in the LR-M category were reclassified using 45 s as the early washout criterion. LR-5 had higher sensitivity (65.5% vs. 76.2%, p = 0.012) and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.80 vs. 0.85, p = 0.001) for HCC diagnosis after reclassification. LR-M also had higher specificity (71.4% vs. 81.3%, p = 0.010) in diagnosing non-HCC malignancies after reclassification. Our findings suggest CEUS LR-5 is effective for HCC diagnosis. The use of 45 s as the time criterion of early washout for LR-M can improve LR-5 and LR-M performance in the diagnosis of HCC and non-HCC malignancies, respectively.     

肝脏影像报告及数据系统2017版(LI-RADS® v2017)解读

肝脏影像报告及数据系统（LI-RADS）是针对肝细胞肝癌（HCC）高危人群制定的影像检查规范。2011年由美国放射学会（ACR）发布第1版,对HCC高危人群肝脏CT/MR检查中影像异常发现的分类进行规定,并对数据采集做出明确规范。第1版LI-RADS发布后医学影像界对此广泛开展验证研究,基于这些研究反馈,2013年、2014年ACR先后2次发布LI-RADS的修订版。2017年7月发布目前最新的修订版本——LI-RADS^® v2017,其中加入新的诊断思路并规定了新的LI-RADS分类,定义和修改了多项征象识别标准,使其更为合理,实用性更强。本文对LI-RADS^® v2017的CT/MR更新内容进行解读。     

Common pitfalls when using the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS): lessons learned from a multi-year experience

The goal of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is to standardize the interpretation and reporting of liver observations on contrast-enhanced CT and MR imaging of patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma. Although LI-RADS represents a significant achievement in standardization of the diagnosis and management of cirrhotic patients, complexity and caveats to the algorithm may challenge correct application in clinical practice. The purpose of this paper is to discuss common pitfalls and potential solutions when applying LI-RADS in practice. Knowledge of the most common pitfalls may improve the diagnostic confidence and performance when using the LI-RADS system for the interpretation of CT and MR imaging of the liver.

     

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) versus non-HCC: accuracy and reliability of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System v2018

Abdominal Radiology - The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) was created to standardize the diagnostic criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and has undergone multiple...