0 430

Cited 10 times in

Diagnostic performance of the LR-M criteria and spectrum of LI-RADS imaging features among primary hepatic carcinomas

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author김명진-
dc.contributor.author김승섭-
dc.contributor.author박미숙-
dc.contributor.author이선영-
dc.contributor.author임준석-
dc.contributor.author최진영-
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-01T18:03:25Z-
dc.date.available2020-12-01T18:03:25Z-
dc.date.issued2020-11-
dc.identifier.issn2366-004X-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/180570-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of LR-M criteria for differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma, intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma, and combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma and to compare the imaging features of each type. Methods: In this retrospective study, 110 patients were surgically diagnosed with cholangiocarcinoma (n = 67) and combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (n = 43) at a single tertiary hospital between 2013 and 2018. Among them, those with risk factors were enrolled (16 cholangiocarcinomas and 33 combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinomas). Forty-nine other patients with size-matched hepatocellular carcinoma were selected as a control group. Two independent readers evaluated the imaging findings of the preoperative MRIs based on LI-RADS version 2018 and assigned an LI-RADS category. The diagnostic performance of the LR-M criteria for diagnosing cholangiocarcinoma or combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma was evaluated, and the imaging features were compared. The imaging findings of the tumors in patients without risk factors (51 cholangiocarcinomas and 10 combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinomas) were evaluated for subgroup analysis. Results: In the non-hepatocellular carcinoma group, 33 patients were categorized into LR-M and 14 patients into LR-5 (67.3% and 28.6%, respectively), while 5 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma were categorized into LR-M and 38 patients into LR-5 (10.2% and 77.6%, respectively). Sensitivity and specificity of the LR-M criteria were 67.3% and 89.8%, respectively. When more than two LR-M features were present, cholangiocarcinoma or combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma were suggested with a specificity of 95.9%. Conclusion: The diagnostic performance of the LR-M criteria is acceptable with moderate sensitivity and high specificity for both cholangiocarcinoma and combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma. Imaging findings of primary hepatic carcinomas should be understood as a spectrum.-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityrestriction-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherSpringer-
dc.relation.isPartOfABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.titleDiagnostic performance of the LR-M criteria and spectrum of LI-RADS imaging features among primary hepatic carcinomas-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Radiology (영상의학교실)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSeung-Seob Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSunyoung Lee-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJin-Young Choi-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJoon Seok Lim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorMi-Suk Park-
dc.contributor.googleauthorMyeong-Jin Kim-
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00261-020-02562-y-
dc.contributor.localIdA00426-
dc.contributor.localIdA05097-
dc.contributor.localIdA01463-
dc.contributor.localIdA05659-
dc.contributor.localIdA03408-
dc.contributor.localIdA04200-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ03314-
dc.identifier.eissn2366-0058-
dc.identifier.pmid32377757-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00261-020-02562-y-
dc.subject.keywordCarcinoma-
dc.subject.keywordCholangiocarcinoma-
dc.subject.keywordDiagnosis-
dc.subject.keywordDifferential-
dc.subject.keywordHepatocellular-
dc.subject.keywordLiver neoplasms-
dc.subject.keywordMagnetic resonance imaging-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameKim, Myeong Jin-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor김명진-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor김승섭-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor박미숙-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor이선영-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor임준석-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor최진영-
dc.citation.volume45-
dc.citation.number11-
dc.citation.startPage3743-
dc.citation.endPage3754-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, Vol.45(11) : 3743-3754, 2020-11-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Radiology (영상의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.