4.5 Article

Prediction of macroscopic findings of hepatocellular carcinoma on hepatobiliary phase of gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: Correlation with pathology

期刊

HEPATOLOGY RESEARCH
卷 43, 期 5, 页码 488-494

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1872-034X.2012.01089.x

关键词

gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid; hepatocellular carcinoma; macroscopic findings; magnetic resonance imaging; pathology

资金

  1. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare
  2. Japanese Health and Labor Sciences research grants

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim We aimed to correlate the macroscopic and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC). Methods This was a multicenter study, whose study protocol was approved by each institutional review board. One hundred and forty-six resected nodules in 124 patients who had received a preoperative hepatobiliary phase of gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid-enhanced MRI (EOB-MRI) were analyzed. In both findings, we compared the diameter of HCC and macroscopic types divided into five types: (i) small nodular type with indistinct margin (SN-IM); (ii) simple nodular type (with distinct margin) (SN-DM); (iii) simple nodular type with extranodular growth (SN-EG); (iv) confluent multinodular type (CMN); and (v) infiltrative type (IF). Results The diameters in each finding (Dsurg and DMRI) were significantly correlated (R=0.961), although Dsurg was larger than DMRI (P=0.0216). There were significant differences between Dsurg in SN-IM and the other groups (P<0.0001). Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 5.3, 99.2 and 87; 84.8, 62.7 and 81.4; 58.1, 91.3 and 84.2; 70.6, 91.5 and 89, in SN-IM, SN-DM, SN-EG and CMN, respectively. The kappa value of every size was as follows: all sizes, 0.45; 20mm or less, 0.23; more than 20mm, 0.56. Conclusion EOB-MRI could predict the macroscopic pathological findings except for SN-IM. Small tumor size might be helpful to diagnose SN-IM.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据