3.9 Article

HCC screening: assessment of an abbreviated non-contrast MRI protocol

Journal

EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY EXPERIMENTAL
Volume 3, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1186/s41747-019-0126-1

Keywords

Carcinoma (hepatocellular); Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging; Liver cirrhosis; Magnetic resonance imaging; Screening

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) guidelines recommend ultrasound screening in high-risk patients. However, in some patients, ultrasound image quality is suboptimal due to factors such as hepatic steatosis, cirrhosis, and confounding lesions. Our aim was to investigate an abbreviated non-contrast magnetic resonance imaging (aNC-MRI) protocol as a potential alternative screening method. Methods A retrospective study was performed using consecutive liver MRI studies performed over 3 years, with set exclusion criteria. The unenhanced T2-weighted, T1-weighted Dixon, and diffusion-weighted sequences were extracted from MRI studies with a known diagnosis. Each anonymised aNC-MRI study was read by three radiologists who stratified each study into either return to 6 monthly screening or investigate with a full contrast-enhanced MRI study. Results A total of 188 patients were assessed; 28 of them had 42 malignant lesions, classified as Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System 4, 5, or M. On a per-patient basis, aNC-MRI had a negative predictive value (NPV) of 97% (95% confidence interval [CI] 95-98%), not significantly different in patients with steatosis (99%, 95% CI 93-100%) and no steatosis (97%, 95% CI 94-98%). Per-patient sensitivity and specificity were 85% (95% CI 75-91%) and 93% (95% CI 90-95%). Conclusion Our aNC-MRI HCC screening protocol demonstrated high specificity (93%) and NPV (97%), with a sensitivity (85%) comparable to that of ultrasound and gadoxetic acid contrast-enhanced MRI. This screening method was robust to hepatic steatosis and may be considered an alternative in the case of suboptimal ultrasound image quality.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available