Login Register Cart 0
Generic placeholder image

Current Medical Imaging

Editor-in-Chief

ISSN (Print): 1573-4056
ISSN (Online): 1875-6603

Back
Journal Home About Journal Editorial Board Journal Insight Current Issue Volumes/Issues
Subscribe
Research Article

Comparison of MRI and CT Scan for the Detection of Liver Cancer

Author(s): Yuangao Liu, Changxiong Chen, Longjin Liu and Yuhui Li*

Volume 19, Issue 9, 2023

Published on: 26 September, 2022

Article ID: e100822207351 Pages: 10

DOI: 10.2174/1573405618666220810100436

Price: $65

Abstract

Objective: The objective of the paper was to compare the value of CT and MRI in the diagnosis of primary carcinoma of the liver.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 132 cases of suspected primary liver carcinoma. CT and MRI diagnosis were performed and pathological results were compared to determine the diagnostic value of the two methods.

Results: 96 cases were diagnosed as primary liver carcinoma by pathological examination after operation. The total detection rate of 96 lesions through MRI was 93.75%, while 84.38% through CT (P<0.05). For lesions with a <3 cm diameter, the CT detection rates of lesions in the plain, arterial, portal, and equilibrium phases were 52.94%, 73.53%, 58.82%, and 58.82% respectively. For lesions with a diameter ≥ 3 cm, the CT detection rate was 80.65 %, 93.55%, 85.48%, and 83.87%, respectively (P<0.05). For lesions with <3cm diameter, the MRI detection rates of lesions in the T1WI, T2WI, LAVA arterial phase, LAVA portal phase, and LAVA balance phase were 61.76%, 76.47%, 88.24%, 79.41%, and 52.94%, respectively, and for lesions with ≥3cm diameter, the detection rates of MRI were 77.42%, 87.10%, 91.94%, 90.32%, and 90.32%, respectively, and the detection rate of lesions with ≥3cm diameter in the balance phase of LAVA was higher (P<0.05). Taking pathological results as the gold standard, the sensitivity of diagnosing primary liver carcinoma through CT is 81.25%, specificity is 75.00%, accuracy is 79.55%, the positive predictive value is 89.66%, the negative predictive value is 60.00%, and the values of the same parameters for the MRI are 93.75. %, 86.11%, 91.67%, 94.74%, and 83.78% respectively.

Conclusion: Both CT and MRI have diagnostic value for primary liver carcinoma. The comparison showed that MRI has a higher diagnostic value and higher detection rate for small lesions. However, the actual process of diagnosis cannot rely solely on MRI, and a comprehensive combination of diagnosis methods will be effective.

Keywords: primary carcinoma of the liver, CT; MRI, diagnosis, imaging features, detection.

[1]
Broutier L, Mastrogiovanni G, Verstegen MM, et al. Human primary liver cancer-derived organoid cultures for disease modeling and drug screening. Nat Med 2017; 23(12): 1424-35.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nm.4438] [PMID: 29131160]
[2]
Wang G, Zhu S, Li X. Comparison of values of CT and MRI imaging in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma and analysis of prognostic factors. Oncol Lett 2019; 17(1): 1184-8.
[PMID: 30655882]
[3]
Hsiao CY, Chen PD, Huang KW. A prospective assessment of the diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound, dynamic computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for patients with small liver tumors. J Clin Med 2019; 8(9): 1353.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm8091353] [PMID: 31480576]
[4]
Schwarze V, Marschner C, Völckers W, et al. Diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound versus computed tomography for hepatocellular carcinoma: A retrospective, single-center evaluation of 234 patients. J Int Med Res 2020; 48(6): 300060520930151.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0300060520930151] [PMID: 32529869]
[5]
Cong WM, Bu H, Chen J, et al. Guideline committee. Practice guidelines for the pathological diagnosis of primary carcinoma of the liver: 2015 update. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22(42): 9279-87.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v22.i42.9279] [PMID: 27895416]
[6]
Ferrante ND, Pillai A, Singal AG. Update on the diagnosis and treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Gastroenterol Hepatol (NY) 2020; 16(10): 506-16.
[PMID: 34017223]
[7]
Wang H, Lu Z, Zhao X. Tumorigenesis, diagnosis, and therapeutic potential of exosomes in liver cancer. J Hematol Oncol 2019; 12(1): 133.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13045-019-0806-6] [PMID: 31815633]
[8]
Long LL, Peng P, Huang ZK. [Early imaging diagnosis of primary liver cancer]. Chung Hua Kan Tsang Ping Tsa Chih 2017; 25(5): 329-32.
[PMID: 28763836]
[9]
Shen Y, Zhang ZB, Wu SD, Wu XB, Li J. Research on values of GDF-15 level in the diagnosis of primary liver cancer and evaluation of chemotherapeutic effect. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2018; 22(12): 3749-54.
[PMID: 29949149]
[10]
Keane FK, Hong TS. Role and future directions of external beam radiotherapy for primary liver cancer. Cancer Contr 2017; 24(3): 1073274817729242.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1073274817729242] [PMID: 28975835]
[11]
Chaudhari VA, Khobragade K, Bhandare M, Shrikhande SV. Management of fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma. Chin Clin Oncol 2018; 7(5): 51.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/cco.2018.08.08] [PMID: 30395718]
[12]
Jiang K, Al-Diffhala S, Centeno BA. Primary liver cancers-part 1: Histopathology, differential diagnoses, and risk stratification. Cancer Contr 2018; 25(1): 1073274817744625.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1073274817744625] [PMID: 29350068]
[13]
Jiang HY, Chen J, Xia CC, Cao LK, Duan T, Song B. Noninvasive imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: From diagnosis to prognosis. World J Gastroenterol 2018; 24(22): 2348-62.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v24.i22.2348] [PMID: 29904242]
[14]
Zhang D, Xu A. Application of dual-source CT perfusion imaging and MRI for the diagnosis of primary liver cancer. Oncol Lett 2017; 14(5): 5753-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/ol.2017.6170] [PMID: 29113204]
[15]
Zhao P, Zheng JS, Zhang HH, et al. [Efficacy evaluation and exploration of TACE combined with CT-guided precision microwave ablation treatment for primary liver cancer]. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi 2016; 38(2): 138-45.
[PMID: 26899335]
[16]
Hajjo R, Sabbah DA, Bardaweel SK, Tropsha A. Identification of tumor-specific MRI biomarkers using machine learning (ML). Diagnostics (Basel) 2021; 11(5): 742.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11050742] [PMID: 33919342]
[17]
Karaosmanoglu AD, Onur MR, Ozmen MN, Akata D, Karcaaltincaba M. Magnetic resonance imaging of liver metastasis. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2016; 37(6): 533-48.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.sult.2016.08.005] [PMID: 27986172]
[18]
Samim M, Molenaar IQ, Seesing MFJ, et al. The diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG PET/CT, CT and MRI in the treatment evaluation of ablation therapy for colorectal liver metastases: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Oncol 2017; 26(1): 37-45.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.suronc.2016.12.006] [PMID: 28317583]
[19]
O’Malley ME, Chawla TP, Lavelle LP, Cleary S, Fischer S. Primary perivascular epithelioid cell tumors of the liver: CT/MRI findings and clinical outcomes. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2017; 42(6): 1705-12.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-017-1074-y] [PMID: 28246920]
[20]
Wagner F, Hakami YA, Warnock G, Fischer G, Huellner MW, Veit-Haibach P. Comparison of contrast-enhanced CT and [18F]FDG PET/CT analysis using kurtosis and skewness in patients with primary colorectal cancer. Mol Imaging Biol 2017; 19(5): 795-803.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11307-017-1066-x] [PMID: 28224325]
[21]
Pech L, Cercueil JP, Jooste V, Krause D, Facy O, Bouvier AM. Current use of MRI in patients with liver metastatic colorectal cancer: A population-based study. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 29(10): 1126-30.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MEG.0000000000000933] [PMID: 28678043]
[22]
Choi SH, Lee SS, Park SH, et al. LI-RADS classification and prognosis of primary liver cancers at gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. Radiology 2019; 290(2): 388-97.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018181290] [PMID: 30422088]
[23]
Shu Z, Fang S, Ding Z, et al. MRI-based radiomics nomogram to detect primary rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases. Sci Rep 2019; 9(1): 3374.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-39651-y] [PMID: 30833648]
[24]
Li JK, Wang M, Yuan J, Song ZG. [CT and MRI findings of primary hepatic neuroendocrine neoplasm]. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi 2017; 39(8): 600-6.
[PMID: 28835083]
[25]
Högemann D, Flemming P, Kreipe H, Galanski M. Correlation of MRI and CT findings with histopathology in hepatic angiomyolipoma. Eur Radiol 2001; 11(8): 1389-95.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s003300000750] [PMID: 11519547]

Rights & Permissions Print Cite
Article Metrics
4
© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy