Comparison of values of CT and MRI imaging in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma and analysis of prognostic factors

Wang,Guibin; Zhu,Shicai; Li,Xiukui

doi:10.3892/ol.2018.9690

Comparison of values of CT and MRI imaging in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma and analysis of prognostic factors

Authors:
- Guibin Wang
- Shicai Zhu
- Xiukui Li
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Imaging, Linyi People's Hospital, Linyi, Shandong 276003, P.R. China, Department of Imaging, Linyi Thoracic Hospital, Linyi, Shandong 276002, P.R. China, Department of Imaging, Linyi Cancer Hospital, Linyi, Shandong 276001, P.R. China
Published online on: November 12, 2018 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.9690
Pages: 1184-1188
Copyright: © Wang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Value of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the diagnosis of small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and in analysis of the prognostic factors of primary hepatocellular carcinoma (PHC) were compared. A total of 300 patients with PHC were selected from January 2013 to January 2016. Among them, 170 patients were diagnosed with small HCC. Patients were diagnosed by MRI and CT scans, respectively, and diagnostic efficacy of the methods was compared. A single factor and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors were performed on 300 patients. The sensitivity of MRI screening was 78.82%, specificity was 78.46%, accuracy was 78.67%, positive predictive value was 82.72%, and negative predictive value was 73.91%. CT screening showed a sensitivity of 62.35%, a specificity of 73.85%, an accuracy of 67.33%, a positive predictive value of 75.71%, and a negative predictive value of 60.00%. Differences in sensitivity, accuracy, and negative predictive value between MRI and CT screening were statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between two groups in specificity and positive predictive value (P>0.05). Diagnostic efficiency of MRI is better than that of CT diagnosis. Univariate analysis showed that age, hepatitis B cirrhosis background, tumor stage, and portal vein embolization were prognostic factors for PHC. Cox multivariate regression analysis showed that the background of liver cirrhosis, tumor stage, and portal thrombosis were independent risk factors for poor prognosis for PHC patient and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). MRI is superior to CT in the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the diagnosis of small HCC. Individualized comprehensive treatment plans based on the patient's condition may be effective in prolonging the patient's survival time. Imaging diagnosis can provide survival basis for patients, improve diagnostic accuracy, and help to improve the survival rate.

View Figures

View References

1	Center MM and Jemal A: International trends in liver cancer incidence rates. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 20:2362–2368. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Mosher CE, Johnson C, Dickler M, Norton L, Massie MJ and DuHamel K: Living with metastatic breast cancer: A qualitative analysis of physical, psychological, and social sequelae. Breast J. 19:285–292. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Tanioka H, Omagari K, Kato Y, Nakata K, Kusumoto Y, Mori I, Furukawa R, Tajima H, Koga M, Yano M, et al: Present status of hepatitis virus-associated hepatocellular carcinoma in Nagasaki Prefecture, Japan: A cross-sectional study of 1019 patients. J Infect Chemother. 8:64–69. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Kim MJ, Lee M, Choi JY and Park YN: Imaging features of small hepatocellular carcinomas with microvascular invasion on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging. Eur J Radiol. 81:2507–2512. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Karageorgos SA, Stratakou S, Koulentaki M, Voumvouraki A, Mantaka A, Samonakis D, Notas G and Kouroumalis EA: Long-term change in incidence and risk factors of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma in Crete, Greece: A 25-year study. Ann Gastroenterol. 30:357–363. 2017.PubMed/NCBI
6	Davila JA, Morgan RO, Shaib Y, McGlynn KA and El-Serag HB: Hepatitis C infection and the increasing incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma: A population-based study. Gastroenterology. 127:1372–1380. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Ascha MS, Hanouneh IA, Lopez R, Tamimi TA, Feldstein AF and Zein NN: The incidence and risk factors of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Hepatology. 51:1972–1978. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Sersté T, Barrau V, Ozenne V, Vullierme MP, Bedossa P, Farges O, Valla DC, Vilgrain V, Paradis V and Degos F: Accuracy and disagreement of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of small hepatocellular carcinoma and dysplastic nodules: Role of biopsy. Hepatology. 55:800–806. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Sano K, Ichikawa T, Motosugi U, Sou H, Muhi AM, Matsuda M, Nakano M, Sakamoto M, Nakazawa T, Asakawa M, et al: Imaging study of early hepatocellular carcinoma: Usefulness of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 261:834–844. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Yu MH, Kim JH, Yoon JH, Kim HC, Chung JW, Han JK and Choi BI: Small (≤1-cm) hepatocellular carcinoma: Diagnostic performance and imaging features at gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 271:748–760. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Sheng RF, Zeng MS, Ji Y, Yang L, Chen CZ and Rao SX: MR features of small hepatocellular carcinoma in normal, fibrotic, and cirrhotic livers: A comparative study. Abdom Imaging. 40:3062–3069. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Kojiro M: Focus on dysplastic nodules and early hepatocellular carcinoma: An Eastern point of view. Liver Transpl. 10 Suppl 1:S3–S8. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Kojiro M and Roskams T: Early hepatocellular carcinoma and dysplastic nodules. Semin Liver Dis. 25:133–142. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Zhao H, Zhou KR and Yan FH: Role of multiphase scans by multirow-detector helical CT in detecting small hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol. 9:2198–2201. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Dale AM and Sereno MI: Improved localizadon of cortical activity by combining EEG and MEG with MRI cortical surface reconstruction: A linear approach. J Cogn Neurosci. 5:162–176. 1993. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Haimerl M, Wächtler M, Platzek I, Müller-Wille R, Niessen C, Hoffstetter P, Schreyer AG, Stroszczynski C and Wiggermann P: Added value of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced hepatobiliary phase MR imaging in evaluation of focal solid hepatic lesions. BMC Med Imaging. 13:412013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Zhao W, Li W, Yi X, Pei Y and Liu H, Zhang L and Liu H: Diagnostic value of liver imaging reporting and data system MRI on primary hepatocellular carcinoma. Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 41:380–387. 2016.(In Chinese). PubMed/NCBI
18	Palmucci S, Mauro LA, Messina M, Russo B, Failla G, Milone P, Berretta M and Ettorre GC: Diffusion-weighted MRI in a liver protocol: Its role in focal lesion detection. World J Radiol. 4:302–310. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Böttcher J, Hansch A, Pfeil A, Schmidt P, Malich A, Schneeweiss A, Maurer MH, Streitparth F, Teichgräber UK and Renz DM: Detection and classification of different liver lesions: Comparison of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI versus multiphasic spiral CT in a clinical single centre investigation. Eur J Radiol. 82:1860–1869. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Inoue T, Hyodo T, Murakami T, Takayama Y, Nishie A, Higaki A, Korenaga K, Sakamoto A, Osaki Y, Aikata H, et al: Hypovascular hepatic nodules showing hypointense on the hepatobiliary-phase image of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI to develop a hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma: A nationwide retrospective study on their natural course and risk factors. Dig Dis. 31:472–479. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Macdonald GA and Peduto AJ: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and diseases of the liver and biliary tract. Part 1. Basic principles, MRI in the assessment of diffuse and focal hepatic disease. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 15:980–991. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Hwang J, Kim SH, Lee MW and Lee JY: Small (≤2 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic liver disease: Comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0 T MRI and multiphasic 64-multirow detector CT. Br J Radiol. 85:e314–e322. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Park VY, Choi JY, Chung YE, Kim H, Park MS, Lim JS, Kim KW and Kim MJ: Dynamic enhancement pattern of HCC smaller than 3 cm in diameter on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI: Comparison with multiphasic MDCT. Liver Int. 34:1593–1602. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24	McNally ME, Martinez A, Khabiri H, Guy G, Michaels AJ, Hanje J, Kirkpatrick R, Bloomston M and Schmidt CR: Inflammatory markers are associated with outcome in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing transarterial chemoembolization. Ann Surg Oncol. 20:923–928. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	Lu DH, Fei ZL, Zhou JP, Hu ZT and Hao WS: A comparison between three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy combined with interventional treatment and interventional treatment alone for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumour thrombosis. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 59:109–114. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI