US LI-RADS in surveillance for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after curative treatment

ObjectivesTo investigate the performance of US LI-RADS in surveillance for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC) after curative treatment.Materials and methodsThis study enrolled 644 patients between January 2018 and August 2018 as a derivation cohort, and 397 patients from September 2018 to December 2018 as a validation cohort. The US surveillance after HCC curative treatment was performed. The US LI-RADS observation categories and visualization scores were analyzed. Four criteria using US LI-RADS or Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) as the surveillance algorithm were evaluated. The sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated.ResultsA total of 212 (32.9%) patients in derivation cohort and 158 (39.8%) patients in validation cohort were detected to have RHCCs. The criterion of US-2/3 or AFP & GE; 20 & mu;g/L had higher sensitivity (derivation, 96.7% vs 92.9% vs 81.1% vs 90.6%; validation, 96.2% vs 90.5% vs 80.4% vs 89.9%) and NPV (derivation, 95.7% vs 93.3% vs 88.0% vs 91.8%; validation, 94.6% vs 89.4% vs 83.6% vs 89.0%), but lower specificity (derivation, 35.9% vs 48.2% vs 67.6% vs 51.9%; validation, 43.5% vs 52.7% vs 66.1% vs 54.0%) than criterion of US-2/3, US-3, and US-3 or AFP & GE; 20 & mu;g/L. Analysis of the visualization score subgroups confirmed that the sensitivity (89.2-97.6% vs 81.0-83.3%) and NPV(88.4-98.0% vs 80.0-83.3%) of score A and score B groups were higher than score C group in criterion of US-2/3 in both two cohorts.ConclusionsIn the surveillance for RHCC, US LI-RADS with AFP had a high sensitivity and NPV when US-2/3 or AFP & GE; 20 & mu;g/L was considered a criterion.

Automated summary

This study investigated the performance of US LI-RADS in surveillance for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC) after curative treatment. Four criteria using US LI-RADS or Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) as the surveillance algorithm were evaluated. The criterion of US-2/3 or AFP ≥ 20μg/L had higher sensitivity and negative predictive value, but lower specificity.