The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) standardizes the interpretation, reporting, and data collection for imaging examinations in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). ...It assigns category codes reflecting relative probability of HCC to imaging-detected liver observations based on major and ancillary imaging features. LI-RADS also includes imaging features suggesting malignancy other than HCC. Supported and endorsed by the American College of Radiology (ACR), the system has been developed by a committee of radiologists, hepatologists, pathologists, surgeons, lexicon experts, and ACR staff, with input from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the Organ Procurement Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing. Development of LI-RADS has been based on literature review, expert opinion, rounds of testing and iteration, and feedback from users. This article summarizes and assesses the quality of evidence supporting each LI-RADS major feature for diagnosis of HCC, as well as of the LI-RADS imaging features suggesting malignancy other than HCC. Based on the evidence, recommendations are provided for or against their continued inclusion in LI-RADS.
RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.
The purpose of this article is to review the use of gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (gadoxetate disodium Gd-EOB-DTPA) in the cirrhotic liver and illustrate the imaging ...appearance of lesions commonly encountered in the cirrhotic liver.
Gd-EOB-DTPA shows promise as a problem-solving tool in the cirrhotic liver because it provides additional information that may be helpful in lesion detection and characterization. Further research is needed to optimize Gd-EOB-DTPA imaging protocols in cirrhosis and develop diagnostic criteria for liver lesions in the cirrhotic liver.
The Liver Imaging and Reporting Data System (LI-RADS) is a comprehensive system for standardizing the terminology, technique, interpretation, reporting, and data collection of liver imaging with the ...overarching goal of improving communication, clinical care, education, and research relating to patients at risk for or diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In 2018, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) integrated LI-RADS into its clinical practice guidance for the imaging-based diagnosis of HCC. The harmonization between the AASLD and LI-RADS diagnostic imaging criteria required minor modifications to the recently released LI-RADS v2017 guidelines, necessitating a LI-RADS v2018 update. This article provides an overview of the key changes included in LI-RADS v2018 as well as a look at the LI-RADS v2018 diagnostic algorithm and criteria, technical recommendations, and management suggestions. Substantive changes in LI-RADS v2018 are the removal of the requirement for visibility on antecedent surveillance ultrasound for LI-RADS 5 (LR-5) categorization of 10-19 mm observations with nonrim arterial phase hyper-enhancement and nonperipheral “washout”, and adoption of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network definition of threshold growth (≥ 50% size increase of a mass in ≤ 6 months). Nomenclatural changes in LI-RADS v2018 are the removal of -us and -g as LR-5 qualifiers.
Purpose
To determine preferences of clinicians and surgeons regarding radiology reporting of liver observations in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
Methods
Members of the American ...College of Radiology Liver Imaging and Data Reporting System (LI-RADS) Outreach & Education Group (30 members) as well as Society of Abdominal Radiology Disease-Focused Panel on HCC diagnosis (27 members) created and distributed an 18-question survey to clinicians and surgeons, with focus on preferences regarding radiology reporting of liver observations in patients. The survey questions were directed to physician demographics, current use of LI-RADS by their local radiologists, their opinions about current LI-RADS and potential improvements.
Results
A total of 152 physicians responded, 66.4% (101/152) from North America, including 42 surgeons, 81 physicians and 29 interventional radiologists. Participants were predominantly from academic centers 83% (126/152), while 13.8% (21/152) worked in private/community centers and 3.2% (5/152) worked in a hybrid practice. Almost 90% (136/152) of participants preferred the use of LI-RADS (compared to nothing or other standardized reporting systems; OPTN and AASLD) to communicate liver-related observations. However, only 28.5% (43/152) of participants input was sought at the time of implementing LI-RADS in their institutions. Fifty-eight percent (88/152) of all participants found standardized LI-RADS management recommendations in radiology reports to be clinically helpful. However, a subgroup analysis of surgeons in academic centers showed that 61.8% (21/34) prefer not to receive standardized LI-RADS recommendations.
Conclusions
Most participants preferred the use LI-RADS in reporting CT and MRI examination. When considering inclusion of management recommendations, radiologists should consult with their referring physicians, as preference may differ.
Contrast-enhanced computed tomography and MRI are frequently used for the noninvasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Despite their important role in diagnosis and management of HCC, ...until recently, there has been no standardized system for their interpretation, reporting and data collection. In 2008, the American College of Radiology convened a committee to develop such a standardized system. This article reviews the role of computed tomography and MRI in the diagnosis and management of HCC; the need for a standardized imaging interpretation system; current HCC imaging criteria included in management guidelines endorsed by the European Association for the Study of Liver, American Association for Study of Liver Diseases, United Network for Organ Sharing and Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver; and the limitations of these criteria. The article then provides an overview of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System and discusses future directions.
A clear understanding of the normal anatomy and pattern of disease spread is important in evaluating many retroperitoneal disorders. Primary retroperitoneal tumors are uncommon, accounting for ...0.1%-0.2% of all malignancies in the body; 80%-90% of all primary retroperitoneal tumors are malignant. The primary retroperitoneal neoplasms can be divided into solid or cystic masses. The solid neoplasms can be classified according to their tissue of origin into 3 main categories: mesodermal tumors, neurogenic tumors, and extragonadal germ cell tumors. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging play a vital role in the localization, characterization, evaluation of the extent of local invasion, assessment of metastases, and determination of treatment response for these tumors. The diagnosis of a primary retroperitoneal malignancy is often challenging owing to overlap of imaging findings. A definitive diagnosis can be established only at histopathologic analysis. However, knowledge of the important tumor characteristics, growth pattern, and vascularity can assist in narrowing the differential diagnosis.
Hepatic steatosis is characterized by abnormal and excessive accumulation of lipids within hepatocytes. It is an important feature of diffuse liver disease, and the histological hallmark of ...non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Other conditions associated with steatosis include alcoholic liver disease, viral hepatitis, HIV and genetic lipodystrophies, cystic fibrosis liver disease, and hepatotoxicity from various therapeutic agents. Liver biopsy, the current clinical gold standard for assessment of liver fat, is invasive and has sampling errors, and is not optimal for screening, monitoring, clinical decision making, or well-suited for many types of research studies. Non-invasive methods that accurately and objectively quantify liver fat are needed. Ultrasound (US) and computed tomography (CT) can be used to assess liver fat but have limited accuracy as well as other limitations. Magnetic resonance (MR) techniques can decompose the liver signal into its fat and water signal components and therefore assess liver fat more directly than CT or US. Most magnetic resonance (MR) techniques measure the signal fat-fraction (the fraction of the liver MR signal attributable to liver fat), which may be confounded by numerous technical and biological factors and may not reliably reflect fat content. By addressing the factors that confound the signal fat-fraction, advanced MR techniques measure the proton density fat-fraction (the fraction of the liver proton density attributable to liver fat), which is a fundamental tissue property and a direct measure of liver fat content. These advanced techniques show promise for accurate fat quantification and are likely to be commercially available soon.
PDF
