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
. 2025 Jun 25.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-025-11775-y. Online ahead of print.

MRI major and ancillary features of LI-RADS for diagnosis of pediatric malignant liver tumors

Se Jin Choi #  1 , Jeong In Shin #  1 , Pyeong Hwa Kim  2 , Hyo Jung Park  1 , Seonok Kim  3 , Ah Young Jung  1 , Young Ah Cho  1 , Jin Seong Lee  1 , In Hye Song  4 , Sujin Gang  5 , Jung-Man Namgoong  5 , Kyung-Nam Koh  6 , Hee Mang Yoon  1
Affiliations

MRI major and ancillary features of LI-RADS for diagnosis of pediatric malignant liver tumors

Se Jin Choi et al. Eur Radiol. .

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate LI-RADS major and ancillary features for MRI-based diagnosis of pediatric malignant liver tumors.

Materials and methods: This single-center retrospective study enrolled pediatric patients who underwent contrast-enhanced liver MRI for focal liver lesions from January 2010-February 2023. Three readers independently performed imaging analysis based on LI-RADS v2018. The reference standard was a pathological diagnosis or stability/regression for over one year on follow-up. Estimation of diagnostic accuracy and multivariable logistic regression were conducted to identify LI-RADS features associated with malignant hepatocellular tumors and hepatic malignancy in general.

Results: Of the 102 patients (median age [interquartile range], 4.5 [0.6-14.0] years; boys:girls, 54:48), 58.8% (60/102) had malignant liver tumors and 49.0% (50/102) had malignant hepatocellular tumors. The sensitivity and specificity of major features for diagnosis of malignant hepatocellular tumors were as follows: nonrim arterial enhancement, 73.4% and 39.6%; enhancing capsule, 56.7% and 92.0%; nonperipheral washout, 70.1% and 94.2%. Nonperipheral washout (sensitivity, 70.1%; specificity, 94.2%; adjusted OR, 34.5; p < 0.001), restricted diffusion (sensitivity, 97.9%; specificity, 53.8%; adjusted OR, 72.3; p = 0.001), and fat-in-mass (sensitivity, 29.0%; specificity, 93.0%; adjusted OR, 4.3; p = 0.01) were associated with malignant hepatocellular tumors, while nonperipheral washout (sensitivity, 58.7%; specificity, 94.5%; adjusted OR, 12.5; p < 0.001), restricted diffusion (sensitivity, 97.1%; specificity, 65.8%; adjusted OR, 31.1; p < 0.001), and mosaic architecture (sensitivity, 79.5%; specificity, 90.0%; adjusted OR, 20.4; p < 0.001) were associated with hepatic malignancy in general.

Conclusion: Restricted diffusion was a sensitive MRI LI-RADS feature, while nonperipheral washout and mosaic architecture were specific features for diagnosing pediatric malignant liver tumors.

Key points: Questions MRI is the recommended modality for pediatric focal liver lesions, but only a few studies have examined the diagnostic accuracy of MRI LI-RADS features in children. Findings Restricted diffusion was sensitive for malignant liver tumors, while mosaic architectures were specific for malignant liver tumors. Nonperipheral washout was specific for diagnosing malignant hepatocellular tumors. Clinical relevance Nonperipheral washout, restricted diffusion, and mosaic architecture were reliable MRI LI-RADS features for diagnosing pediatric malignant liver tumors.

Keywords: Child; Liver; Magnetic resonance imaging; Neoplasms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Compliance with ethical standards. Guarantor: The scientific guarantor of this publication is Pyeong Hwa Kim. Conflict of interest: The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. Statistics and biometry: One of the authors has significant statistical expertise. Informed consent: Only if the study is on human subjects: Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board. Ethical approval: Institutional Review Board approval was obtained. Study subjects or cohorts overlap: Study subjects or cohorts have not been previously reported. Methodology: Retrospective Diagnostic or prognostic study Performed at one institution

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Darbari A, Sabin KM, Shapiro CN, Schwarz KB (2003) Epidemiology of primary hepatic malignancies in U.S. children. Hepatology 38:560–566. https://doi.org/10.1053/jhep.2003.50375 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jeong SU, Kang HJ (2022) Recent updates on the classification of hepatoblastoma according to the International Pediatric Liver Tumors Consensus. J Liver Cancer 22:23–29. https://doi.org/10.17998/jlc.2022.02.24 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
    1. Chavhan GB, Schooler GR, Tang ER et al (2023) Optimizing imaging of pediatric liver lesions: guidelines from the pediatric LI-RADS Working Group. Radiographics 43:e220043. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.220043 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Adeyiga AO, Lee EY, Eisenberg RL (2012) Focal hepatic masses in pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:W422–W440. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.11.7581 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Schooler GR, Squires JH, Alazraki A et al (2020) Pediatric hepatoblastoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, and other hepatic neoplasms: consensus imaging recommendations from American College of Radiology Pediatric Liver Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) Working Group. Radiology 296:493–497. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200751 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources