Prospective evaluation of Gadoxetate-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography for hepatocellular carcinoma detection and transplant eligibility assessment with explant histopathology correlation

Background We aimed to prospectively compare the diagnostic performance of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI (EOB-MRI) and contrast-enhanced Computed Tomography (CECT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) detection and liver transplant (LT) eligibility assessment in cirrhotic patients with explant histopathology correlation.Methods In this prospective, single-institution ethics-approved study, 101 cirrhotic patients were enrolled consecutively from the pre-LT clinic with written informed consent. Patients underwent CECT and EOB-MRI alternately every 3 months until LT or study exclusion. Two blinded radiologists independently scored hepatic lesions on CECT and EOB-MRI utilizing the liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) version 2018. Liver explant histopathology was the reference standard. Pre-LT eligibility accuracies with EOB-MRI and CECT as per Milan criteria (MC) were assessed in reference to post-LT explant histopathology. Lesion-level and patient-level statistical analyses were performed.Results Sixty patients (49 men; age 33-72 years) underwent LT successfully. One hundred four non-treated HCC and 42 viable HCC in previously treated HCC were identified at explant histopathology. For LR-4/5 category lesions, EOB-MRI had a higher pooled sensitivity (86.7% versus 75.3%, p < 0.001) but lower specificity (84.6% versus 100%, p < 0.001) compared to CECT. EOB-MRI had a sensitivity twice that of CECT (65.9% versus 32.2%, p < 0.001) when all HCC identified at explant histopathology were included in the analysis instead of imaging visible lesions only. Disregarding the hepatobiliary phase resulted in a significant drop in EOB-MRI performance (86.7 to 72.8%, p < 0.001). EOB-MRI had significantly lower pooled sensitivity and specificity versus CECT in the LR5 category with lesion size < 2 cm (50% versus 79%, p = 0.002 and 88.9% versus 100%, p = 0.002). EOB-MRI had higher sensitivity (84.8% versus 75%, p < 0.037) compared to CECT for detecting < 2 cm viable HCC in treated lesions. Accuracies of LT eligibility assessment were comparable between EOB-MRI (90-91.7%, p = 0.156) and CECT (90-95%, p = 0.158).Conclusion EOB-MRI had superior sensitivity for HCC detection; however, with lower specificity compared to CECT in LR4/5 category lesions while it was inferior to CECT in the LR5 category under 2 cm. The accuracy for LT eligibility assessment based on MC was not significantly different between EOB-MRI and CECT.

Automated summary

This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of EOB-MRI and CECT for HCC detection and LT eligibility assessment. The results showed that EOB-MRI had higher sensitivity but lower specificity compared to CECT in LR4/5 category lesions, and was inferior to CECT in the LR5 category under 2 cm. However, the accuracy for LT eligibility assessment based on Milan criteria was comparable between EOB-MRI and CECT.