2018版肝脏影像报告数据系统诊断小肝细胞癌(≤3 cm)的应用价值

肝脏 ›› 2021, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (10): 1096-1098.

2018版肝脏影像报告数据系统诊断小肝细胞癌(≤3 cm)的应用价值

梁旭, 刘圆圆, 杨学刚, 任静

610041 成都四川省肿瘤医院影像科

收稿日期:2020-11-12 出版日期:2021-10-31 发布日期:2021-12-07
通讯作者: 任静,Email:RenJennycd@163.com
基金资助:
四川省医学科研课题计划(Q18004)

The utility of liver imaging report data system version 2018 in the diagnosis of small hepatocellular carcinoma ( ≤ 3 cm)

LIANG Xu, LIU Yuan-yuan, YANG Xue-gang, REN Jing

Department of Radiology, Sichuan Cancer Hospital,Chengdu 610041, China

Received:2020-11-12 Online:2021-10-31 Published:2021-12-07
Contact: REN Jing,Email:RenJennycd@163.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的探讨2018版肝脏影像报告数据系统(LI-RADS)诊断小肝细胞癌的效能和阅片者间一致性。方法收集2017年6月—2020年7月四川省肿瘤医院符合纳入标准的115例患者(115个病灶)的CT和MRI影像资料,其中手术病理证实HCC 89例、非HCC恶性肿瘤9例,良性病灶17例。两名放射科医生盲法独立回顾性阅片,依据LI-RADS v2018分类法则,对所有病灶进行分类。两名医生的LI-RADS分类结果行Kappa一致性检验;以术后病理结果为“金标准”,计算两名医生应用LI-RADS v2018诊断HCC的敏感性、特异性、准确性,差异行McNemar检验。结果两名医生LI-RADS分类结果一致性较好,Kappa值为0.784(95%CI:0.692～0.876);以LR-5类为阳性值,两名医生应用LI-RADS v2018诊断HCC的敏感性、特异性及准确性分别为61.8%、96.2%、69.6%及58.4%、88.5%、65.2%,差异无统计学意义,P>0.05;以LR-5/4类为阳性值,两名医生诊断HCC的敏感性、特异性及准确性分别为78.8%、80.8%、79.1%及78.8%、65.4%、75.6%,差异无统计学意义,P>0.05。结论 2018版肝脏影像影像报告数据系统诊断小肝细胞癌有中度的敏感性和较高的特异性,并具有较好的阅片者一致性。

关键词: 肝细胞癌, 肝脏影像报告数据系统, 磁共振成像, 体层摄影术, X射线计算机

Abstract: Objective To investigate the efficiency of liver imaging report data system version 2018(LI-RADSv2108)in the diagnosis of small hepatocellular carcinoma (sHCC) and the consistency between LI-RADSv2108 and radiologists. Methods One hundred and fifteen patients admitted to our hospital from June 2017 to July 2020 were selected, including 89 HCC patients, 9 non-HCC malignant tumors and 17 benign lesions. The images were analyzed retrospectively with blind evaluation by 2 radiologists, and all the lesions were classified according to standard of LI-RADSv2108. The consistency of the conclusion drawn by the 2 radiologists was analyzed by Kappa statistic. Taking the postoperative pathological results as gold standard, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the diagnositic conclusions drawn by the 2 radiologists using LI-RADSv2108 were calculated. McNemar test was performed for the differences. Results The consistency of the diagnositc results between the 2 radiologists was substantial, Kappa value was 0.748 (95% CI: 0.692-0.876). Using LR-5 as a predictor of sHCC, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of the diagnositic conclusion drawn by the 2 radiologists respectively using LI-RADSv2108 were 61.8%, 96.2%, 69.6% and 58.4%, 88.5%, 65.2%, respectively, with no significant difference (P>0.05); Using LR 4/5 as a predictor of sHCC, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 78.8%, 80.8%, 79.1% and 78.8%, 65.4%, 75.6%, respectively, with no significant difference (P>0.05). Conclusion LI-RSDSv2018 has moderate sensitivity and high specificity in diagnosing sHCC and the consistency between LI-RADSv2108 and radiologists is good.

Key words: Hepatocellular carcinoma, Liver imaging report data system, Magnetic resonance imaging, X-ray computer tomography

梁旭, 刘圆圆, 杨学刚, 任静. 2018版肝脏影像报告数据系统诊断小肝细胞癌(≤3 cm)的应用价值[J]. 肝脏, 2021, 26(10): 1096-1098.

LIANG Xu, LIU Yuan-yuan, YANG Xue-gang, REN Jing. The utility of liver imaging report data system version 2018 in the diagnosis of small hepatocellular carcinoma ( ≤ 3 cm)[J]. Chinese Hepatolgy, 2021, 26(10): 1096-1098.

参考文献

[1] 中华人民共和国国家卫生健康委员会医政医管局. 原发性肝癌诊疗规范(2019年版). 中华肝脏病杂志, 2020,2:112-127.
[2] 刘会永, 万象新, 陈先平, 等. CT动态增强与MRI诊断小肝癌的效果对比分析. 肝脏, 2019,3:326-328.
[3] Lee S, Kim MJ, Kim SS, et al. Retrospective comparison of EASL 2018 and LI-RADS 2018 for the noninvasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma using magnetic resonance imaging. Hepatol Int, 2020,14:70-79.
[4] Choi SH, Lee SS, Park SH, et al. LI-RADS Classification and Prognosis of Primary Liver Cancers at Gadoxetic Acid-enhanced MRI. Radiology, 2019,290:388-397.
[5] Kang JH, Choi SH, Byun JH, et al. Ancillary features in the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System: how to improve diagnosis of hepato cellular carcinoma ≤3 cm on magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol, 2020,30:2881-2889.
[6] Byun J, Choi SH, Byun JH, et al. Comparison of the diagnostic performance of imaging criteria for HCCs≤3.0 cm on gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI. Hepatol Int, 2020,14:534-543.
[7] Darnell A, Forner A, Rimola J, et al. Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System with MR Imaging: Evaluation in Nodules 20 mm or Smaller Detec ted in Cirrhosis at Screening US. Radiology, 2015,275:698-707.
[8] Tang Q, Ma C. Performance of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI for the diagnosis of LI-RADS 4 category hepatocellular carcinoma nodules with different diameters. Oncol Lett, 2018,16:2725-2731.
[9] Basha MAA, Refaat R, Mohammad FF, et al. The utility of diffusion-weighted imaging in improving the sensitivity of LI-RADS classification of s mall hepatic observations suspected of malignancy. Abdom Radiol (NY), 2019,44:1773-1784.
[10] De Gaetano AM, Catalano M, Pompili M, et al. Critical analysis of major and ancillary features of LI-RADS v2018 in the differentiation of small (≤ 2 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma from dysplastic nodules with gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced magneti c resonance imaging. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci, 2019,23:7786-7801.
[11] Ronot M, Fouque O, Esvan M, et al. Comparison of the accuracy of AASLD and LI-RADS criteria for the non-invasive diagnosis of HCC smaller than 3 cm. J Hepatol, 2018,68:715-723.
[12] Min JH, Kim JM, Kim YK, et al. Prospective Intraindividual Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Gadoxetic Acid and Extracellular Contrast for Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinomas Using the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System. Hepatology, 2018,68:2254-2266.
[13] 杜婧, 杨大为, 张楠, 等. 基于肝脏影像报告和数据系统肝细胞肝癌MRI征象判读的一致性. 中国医学影像学杂志, 2019,27:481-486.
[14] 王影, 余深平, 刘影, 等. 根据2013版肝脏影像报告与数据管理系统诊断肝脏病灶的一致性. 中国介入影像与治疗学, 2020,17:172-176.
[15] 杨采薇, 蒋涵羽, 宋彬, 等. 基于钆塞酸二钠增强MRI采用2018版LI-RADS诊断肝细胞癌的效能. 中华放射学杂志, 2019,53:1060-1064.