Diagnostic imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma at community hospitals and their tertiary referral center in the era of LI-RADS: a quality assessment study

被引:3
|
作者
Chan, Andrew [1 ]
Sertic, Madeleine [1 ]
Sammon, Jennifer [1 ,2 ]
Kim, Tae Kyoung [1 ,2 ]
Jang, Hyun-Jung [1 ,2 ]
Guimaraes, Luis [1 ,2 ]
O'Malley, Martin [1 ,2 ]
Khalili, Korosh [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Dept Med Imaging, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Univ Hlth Network, Womens Coll Hosp, Joint Dept Med Imaging, Sinai Hlth Syst, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Hlth Network, Princess Margaret Canc Ctr, Joint Dept Med Imaging, 610 Univ Ave, Toronto, ON M5G 2M9, Canada
关键词
Hepatocellular carcinoma; Diagnosis; Quality; Liver; CT; MRI; LI-RADS; RELIABILITY; CRITERIA; VERSION; TUMOR;
D O I
10.1007/s00261-019-02237-3
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose To assess guideline compliance and quality of hepatocellular carcinoma, (HCC) diagnostic imaging within community hospitals (CH) and their Tertiary referral center (TRC) in a moderately high incidence region. Methods Initial diagnostic workup CT/MRI scans of 251 patients (122 CH, 112 TRC, 17 Non-TRC academic) with HCC over a 15-month period were assessed for Liver reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) guideline compliance. 269 scans (182 CT, 87 MRI) were qualitatively evaluated by 2 independent blinded radiologists for arterial timing, overall image quality, noise and sharpness, with quantification of interobserver variability. The contrast enhancement ratio (CER) for the largest HCC on each scan was calculated using pre- and post-contrast images. Results 103/104 (99%) of TRC and 44/78 (56%) of CH CTs adhered to LI-RADS imaging guidelines (P < 0.0001). Lack of delayed phase accounted for 32/34 (94%) of noncompliant CH CTs. Regarding MRI, 19/19 (100%) of TRC and 60/68 (88%) of CH scans were adherent (P = 0.12). For both modalities, overall image quality, noise and sharpness were rated significantly higher for TRC than CH. There was moderate interobserver agreement with intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.73, 0.70 and 0.63, respectively. Arterial-phase timing was rated adequate for CT in 75/104 TRC (72%) and 10/68 (14%) CH scans (P < 0.0001) and for MRI in 8/19 (42%) TRC and 23/68 (33%) CH scans (P = 0.17). The CER was significantly higher for TRC versus CH (2.9 vs. 1.9, P < 0.001) and MRI (0.9 vs. 0.7, P = 0.03). Conclusions Community hospital HCC diagnostic scans significantly lag in critical quality parameters of tumor enhancement, arterial phase timing, perceived image quality, and LI-RADS CT technique compliance compared to a TRC.
引用
收藏
页码:4028 / 4036
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Predictors and Cumulative Frequency of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in High and Intermediate LI-RADS Lesions: A Cohort Study from a Canadian Academic Institution
    Tang, Ephraim Shin-Tian
    Hall, Grayson
    Yu, David
    Menard, Alexandre
    Hopman, Wilma
    Nanji, Sulaiman
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2019, 26 (08) : 2560 - 2567
  • [32] US LI-RADS visualization score: diagnostic outcome of ultrasound-guided focal hepatic lesion biopsy in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma
    Kang, Ji Hun
    Choi, Sang Hyun
    Kim, So Yeon
    Lee, So Jung
    Shin, Yong Moon
    Won, Hyung Jin
    Kim, Pyo-Nyun
    ULTRASONOGRAPHY, 2021, 40 (01) : 167 - 175
  • [33] Retrospective comparison of EASL 2018 and LI-RADS 2018 for the noninvasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma using magnetic resonance imaging
    Sunyoung Lee
    Myeong-Jin Kim
    Seung-seob Kim
    Hyejung Shin
    Do Young Kim
    Jin-Young Choi
    Mi-Suk Park
    Donald G. Mitchell
    Hepatology International, 2020, 14 : 70 - 79
  • [34] Comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and T2-weighted single shot fast spin-echo: Implications for LI-RADS characterization of hepatocellular carcinoma
    Hicks, Robert M.
    Yee, Judy
    Ohliger, Michael A.
    Weinstein, Stefanie
    Kao, Jeffrey
    Ikram, Nabia S.
    Hope, Thomas A.
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2016, 34 (07) : 915 - 921
  • [35] Value of CT and MR Imaging in Assessment of Loco-regional Ablated Hepatocellular Carcinoma using LI-RADS Treatment Response Algorithm (version 2018)
    Zarad, Carmen Ali
    Elagawy, Waleed
    Hasan, Basma Badreldin
    Abd-Elsalam, Sherief
    Shanab, Waleed Abo S.
    CURRENT CANCER THERAPY REVIEWS, 2023, 19 (03) : 260 - 270
  • [36] The role of dynamic and diffusion MR imaging in therapeutic response assessment after microwave ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma using LI-RADS v2018 treatment response algorithm
    Mahmoud, Bahaa Eldin
    Gadalla, Amr Abd Elfattah Hassan
    Elkholy, Shaima Fattouh
    EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2021, 52 (01)
  • [37] Comparison of the diagnostic performance of the 2017 and 2018 versions of LI-RADS for hepatocellular carcinoma on gadoxetic acid enhanced MRI
    Ko, A.
    Park, H. J.
    Lee, E. S.
    Park, S. B.
    Kim, Y. K.
    Choi, S-Y
    Ahn, S.
    CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 2020, 75 (04) : 319.e1 - 319.e9
  • [38] Diagnostic performance of intravascular perfusion based contrast-enhanced ultrasound LI-RADS in the evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma
    Zuo, Dongsheng
    Yang, Kefeng
    Wu, Size
    CLINICAL HEMORHEOLOGY AND MICROCIRCULATION, 2021, 78 (04) : 429 - 437
  • [39] Hepatic Steatosis Has No Effect in Diagnosis Accuracy of LI-RADS v2018 Categorization of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in MR Imaging
    Yao, Shan
    Wei, Yi
    Ye, Zheng
    Chen, Jie
    Duan, Ting
    Zhang, Zhen
    Song, Bin
    JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2024, 59 (06) : 2060 - 2070
  • [40] Optimal lexicon of gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma modified from LI-RADS
    Shin Hye Hwang
    Sumi Park
    Kyunghwa Han
    Jin-young Choi
    Young-Nyun Park
    Mi-Suk Park
    Abdominal Radiology, 2019, 44 : 3078 - 3088