• Abdom Radiol (NY) · Feb 2020

    Comparative Study

    Performance of liver surface nodularity quantification for the diagnosis of portal hypertension in patients with cirrhosis: comparison between MRI with hepatobiliary phase sequences and CT.

    • Nicolas De Vos, Riccardo Sartoris, François Cauchy, Pierre-Emmanuel Rautou, Valérie Vilgrain, and Maxime Ronot.
    • Department of Radiology, APHP, University Hospitals Paris Nord Val de Seine, Beaujon, 100 Boulevard du Général Leclerc, 92110, Clichy, France.
    • Abdom Radiol (NY). 2020 Feb 1; 45 (2): 365-372.

    PurposeTo assess and compare the performance of liver surface nodularity (LSN) quantification using Gd-BOPTA-enhanced MRI and contrast-enhanced CT for the diagnosis of clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) in patients with cirrhosis.MethodsThis retrospective study included 30 patients with compensated histologically proven cirrhosis who underwent hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), abdominal CT and Gd-BOPTA-MRI within a 60-day interval during pre-surgery workup for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) between January 2016 and August 2018. LSN score was derived from CT portal venous phase (PVP), axial T2- and T1-weighted PVP and hepatobiliary phase (HBP). Accuracy for the detection of CSPH was evaluated for each set of images by ROC curve analysis. Intra-observer, inter-observer and inter-method reproducibilities were assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of variation (CV).ResultsThirty patients were analysed (23 men [77%], mean age 60 ± 11 years old), including 15 (50%) with CSPH. All CT- and MRI-derived LSN quantifications were correlated to HVPG (CT-PVP: r = 0.63, p = 0.001, AUROC = 0.908 ± 0.06; T1-w-PVP: r = 0.43, p = 0.028, AUROC = 0.876 ± 0.07; T1-w-HBP: r = 0.50, p = 0.012, AUROC = 0.823 ± 0.08; T2-w: r = 0.51, p = 0.007, AUROC = 0.801 ± 0.09). There was no significant difference in AUROC pairwise comparisons (p = 0.12-0.88). Patients with CSPH had higher LSN than those without (CT-PVP: 3.2 ± 0.6 vs 2.4 ± 0.5, p < 0.001; T1-w-PVP: 2.7 ± 0.4 vs 2.2 ± 0.4, p = 0.002; T1-w-HBP: 3.0 ± 0.6 vs 2.3 ± 0.3, p < 0.001; T2-w: 3.0 ± 0.6 vs 2.2 ± 0.3, p = 0.001) and 86%, 82%, 85% and 82% of patients were correctly classified, respectively. Reproducibility of inter-image set comparisons was excellent (ICC = 0.84-0.96 and CV = 8.3-14.2%).ConclusionThe diagnostic performance of MRI-based LSN for detecting CSPH is strong and similar to that of CT-based LSN.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…