Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024
How to differentiate between combined hepatocellular carcinoma-cholangiocarcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with rim arterial phase hyperenhancement?
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhou Changwu, Huang Peng, Wu Fei, Xiao Yuyao, Yang Chun, Zeng Mengsu
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To analyze and compare the differences in MRI features between combined hepatocellular carcinoma-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) with arterial phase peripheral enhancement, so as to provide valuable references for preoperative differential diagnosis.
METHODS: Seventy cHCC-CCA patients and 74 iCCA patients confirmed by pathology were included in this study. Their contrast-enhanced MRI showed rim arterial phase hyperenhancement (Rim APHE). The differences of clinicopathological data and MRI features between cHCC-CCA and iCCA were compared. Then, the sensitivity, specificity, and area under curve (AUC) were also analyzed and compared.
RESULTS: Seventy cHCC-CCA patients (mean age, 55.7 ± 10.6 years) and 74 iCCA patients (mean age, 61.1 ± 10.5 years) were evaluated. In this study, univariable and multivariable regression analysis showed that AFP > 20 ng/ml (OR = 5.824, p = 0.006), enhancing capsule (OR = 7.252, p = 0.001), and mosaic architecture (OR = 32.732, p < 0.001) were independent risk factors of cHCC-CCA with Rim APHE. However, only hepatic capsule retraction (OR = 0.091, p < 0.001) was an independent predictor of iCCA. In addition, combining AFP > 20 ng/ml with enhancing capsule (96.7% vs. 79.2%, p < 0.001) and/or mosaic architecture (96.4% vs. 94.7%, p < 0.001) can improve the sensitivity of differentiating cHCC-CCA (vs. iCCA) with Rim APHE.
CONCLUSION: The combination of elevated AFP and MRI features, such as enhancing capsule and mosaic architecture, will help in preoperative differential diagnosis of cHCC-CCA and iCCA with Rim APHE.
METHODS: Seventy cHCC-CCA patients and 74 iCCA patients confirmed by pathology were included in this study. Their contrast-enhanced MRI showed rim arterial phase hyperenhancement (Rim APHE). The differences of clinicopathological data and MRI features between cHCC-CCA and iCCA were compared. Then, the sensitivity, specificity, and area under curve (AUC) were also analyzed and compared.
RESULTS: Seventy cHCC-CCA patients (mean age, 55.7 ± 10.6 years) and 74 iCCA patients (mean age, 61.1 ± 10.5 years) were evaluated. In this study, univariable and multivariable regression analysis showed that AFP > 20 ng/ml (OR = 5.824, p = 0.006), enhancing capsule (OR = 7.252, p = 0.001), and mosaic architecture (OR = 32.732, p < 0.001) were independent risk factors of cHCC-CCA with Rim APHE. However, only hepatic capsule retraction (OR = 0.091, p < 0.001) was an independent predictor of iCCA. In addition, combining AFP > 20 ng/ml with enhancing capsule (96.7% vs. 79.2%, p < 0.001) and/or mosaic architecture (96.4% vs. 94.7%, p < 0.001) can improve the sensitivity of differentiating cHCC-CCA (vs. iCCA) with Rim APHE.
CONCLUSION: The combination of elevated AFP and MRI features, such as enhancing capsule and mosaic architecture, will help in preoperative differential diagnosis of cHCC-CCA and iCCA with Rim APHE.