Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Jun 11;8(6):e66141.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0066141. Print 2013.

Characterization of incidental liver lesions: comparison of multidetector CT versus Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging

Affiliations

Characterization of incidental liver lesions: comparison of multidetector CT versus Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging

Yong Eun Chung et al. PLoS One. .

Erratum in

  • PLoS One. 2013;8(10). doi:10.1371/annotation/a03efa25-49f8-4616-a256-074a3d60ceaf

Abstract

As a result of recent developments in imaging modalities and wide spread routine medical checkups and screening, more incidental liver lesions are found frequently on US these days. When incidental liver lesions are found on US, physicians have to make a decision whether to just follow up or to undergo additional imaging studies for lesion characterization. In order to choose the next appropriate imaging modality, the diagnostic accuracy of each imaging study needs to be considered. Therefore, we tried to compare the accuracy of contrast-enhanced multidetector CT (MDCT) and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI for characterization of incidental liver masses. We included 127 incidentally found focal liver lesions (94 benign and 33 malignant) from 80 patients (M∶F = 45∶35) without primary extrahepatic malignancy or chronic liver disease. Two radiologists independently reviewed Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI and MDCT. The proportion of confident interpretations for differentiation of benign and malignant lesions and for the specific diagnosis of diseases were compared. The proportion of confident interpretations for the differentiation of benign and malignant lesions was significantly higher with EOB-MRI(94.5%-97.6%) than with MDCT (74.0%-92.9%). In terms of specific diagnosis, sensitivity and accuracy were significantly higher with EOB-MRI than with MDCT for the diagnosis of focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) and focal eosinophilic infiltration. The diagnoses of the remaining diseases were comparable between EOB-MRI and MDCT. Hence, our results suggested that Gd-EOB-MRI may provide a higher proportion of confident interpretations than MDCT, especially for the diagnosis of incidentally found FNH and focal eosinophilic infiltration.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. 73-year-old female with incidental liver mass.
(a) Arial phase CT image shows ill-defined hypervascular lesion in segment 8 of the liver (arrow). (b) The lesion shows isoattenuation on portal venous phase and both reviewers diagnosed this lesion as arterioportal shunt on CT with a confidence level of 4 and 3, respectively. (c) However, this lesion presented with high signal intensity compared to the adjacent normal liver on hepatobiliary phase of MR image (arrow). The diagnosis was changed to FNH on MR with a high confidence level of 5 by both reviewers.
Figure 2
Figure 2. 50-year-old man presented incidental liver mass.
(a) On arterial phase CT image, faint arterial enhancing nodule is noted in the left lobe of the liver. (b) The lesion shows slightly low attenuation compared to adjacent liver on delayed CT image. Both reviewers diagnosed the lesion as HCC with a confidence level of 4 and 3 on CT. (c) On MR, the lesion showed high signal intensity on the hepatobiliary phase and the diagnosis was changed to FNH by both reviewers, but the lesion was confirmed as well-differentiated HCC by surgery.

References

    1. Gore RM, Newmark GM, Thakrar KH, Mehta UK, Berlin JW (2011) Hepatic incidentalomas. Radiol Clin North Am 49: 291–322. - PubMed
    1. Boutros C, Katz SC, Espat NJ (2010) Management of an incidental liver mass. Surg Clin North Am 90: 699–718. - PubMed
    1. Karhunen PJ (1986) Benign hepatic tumours and tumour like conditions in men. J Clin Pathol 39: 183–188. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Furtado CD, Aguirre DA, Sirlin CB, Dang D, Stamato SK, et al. (2005) Whole-body CT screening: spectrum of findings and recommendations in 1192 patients. Radiology 237: 385–394. - PubMed
    1. Soussan M, Aube C, Bahrami S, Boursier J, Valla DC, et al. (2010) Incidental focal solid liver lesions: diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and MR imaging. Eur Radiol 20: 1715–1725. - PubMed