Contrast-Enhanced US Using Perfluorobutane for Diagnosing Small HCC in High-Risk Patients: Comparison with MRI
Yu Li1, Shilin Lu1, Siyue Mao2
1Department of Ultrasound, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Provincial Clinical Research Center for Cancer, No. 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou 510060, China.
Abstract:
Background Evidence supporting the incorporation of perfluorobutane (PFB) contrast-enhanced US (CEUS) into Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) in diagnosing small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (≤20 mm) in patients at high risk for HCC remains limited. Purpose To compare diagnostic performance of PFB CEUS and MRI for small HCC in high-risk patients. Materials and Methods This multicenter retrospective study included high-risk patients who underwent PFB CEUS and concurrent MRI for evaluating liver nodules 20 mm or smaller from March 2020 to November 2023. PFB CEUS strategy A followed LR-5 criteria based on CEUS LI-RADS version 2017: observations that were at least 10 mm with nonrim arterial-phase hyperenhancement (APHE), with late and mild washout assessed up to 5 minutes postinjection; strategy B expanded on strategy A by also incorporating observations 10 mm or larger with nonrim APHE, no washout up to 5 minutes, and hypoenhancement on Kupffer-phase images. The diagnostic performance of these two CEUS strategies and MRI LI-RADS version 2018 was compared using a generalized estimating equations approach. Results A total of 365 patients (median age, 54 years; IQR, 47-61 years; 310 men) with 399 observations (median diameter, 16 mm; IQR, 12-19 mm; 252 HCCs, 41 non-HCC malignancies, 106 benign nodules) were included. Strategy B yielded higher sensitivity than strategy A (65.9% [166 of 252] vs 57.1% [144 of 252]; P < .001) without evidence of a decrease in specificity (91.8% [135 of 147] vs 93.9% [138 of 147]; P = .07). Compared with MRI, strategy B showed no evidence of a difference in sensitivity (65.9% [166 of 252] vs 72.6% [183 of 252]; P = .07) and specificity (91.8% [135 of 147] vs 90.5% [133 of 147]; P = .59). Strategies A and B showed higher specificity (97.4% [76 of 78] vs 89.9% [62 of 69]; 96.2% [75 of 78] vs 87.0% [60 of 69], respectively; both P = .04) but no evidence of a difference in sensitivity (54.8% [46 of 84] vs 58.3% [98 of 168] [P = .63]; 61.9% [52 of 84] vs 67.9% [114 of 168] [P = .39], respectively) in patients without cirrhosis versus in patients with cirrhosis. Conclusion In patients at high risk for HCC, PFB CEUS incorporating Kupffer-phase findings was effective for diagnosing small HCC, with diagnostic performance similar to MRI. © RSNA, 2026 Supplemental material is available for this article.
More Related Videos
09:49Dual-phase Cone-beam Computed Tomography to See, Reach, and Treat Hepatocellular Carcinoma during Drug-eluting Beads Transarterial Chemo-embolization
Published on: December 2, 2013
09:23Author Spotlight: Enhancing Transplantation Research Through MicroCT Angiography in Murine Models
Published on: September 22, 2023
