We performed an updated meta-analysis to determine the diagnostic performance of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS, LR) 5 category for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) using LI-RADS version 2018 (v2018), and to evaluate differences by imaging modalities and type of MRI contrast material.

The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched for studies reporting the performance of LR-5 using v2018 for diagnosing HCC. A bivariate random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled per-observation sensitivity and specificity. Subgroup analysis was performed based on imaging modalities and type of MRI contrast material.

Forty-eight studies qualified for the meta-analysis, comprising 9031 patients, 10,547 observations, and 7216 HCCs. The pooled per-observation sensitivity and specificity of LR-5 for diagnosing HCC were 66% (95% CI, 61-70%) and 91% (95% CI, 89-93%), respectively. In the subgroup analysis, MRI with extracellular agent (ECA-MRI) showed significantly higher pooled sensitivity (77% [95% CI, 70-82%]) than CT (66% [95% CI, 58-73%]; p = 0.023) or MRI with gadoxetate (Gx-MRI) (65% [95% CI, 60-70%]; p = 0.001), but there was no significant difference between ECA-MRI and MRI with gadobenate (gadobenate-MRI) (73% [95% CI, 61-82%]; p = 0.495). Pooled specificities were 88% (95% CI, 80-93%) for CT, 92% (95% CI, 86-95%) for ECA-MRI, 93% (95% CI, 91-95%) for Gx-MRI, and 91% (95% CI, 84-95%) for gadobenate-MRI without significant differences (p = 0.084-0.803).

LI-RADS v2018 LR-5 provides high specificity for HCC diagnosis regardless of modality or contrast material, while ECA-MRI showed higher sensitivity than CT or Gx-MRI.

Refinement of the criteria for improving sensitivity while maintaining high specificity of LR-5 for HCC diagnosis may be an essential future direction.

• The pooled per-observation sensitivity and specificity of LR-5 for diagnosing HCC using LI-RADSv2018 were 66% and 91%, respectively. • ECA-MRI showed higher sensitivity than CT (77% vs 66%, p = 0.023) or Gx-MRI (77% vs 65%, p = 0.001). • LI-RADS v2018 LR-5 provides high specificity (88-93%) for HCC diagnosis regardless of modality or contrast material type.

We aimed to evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018 for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ≤ 3.0 cm on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI according to the etiology of cirrhosis.

Thirty-eight patients with alcoholic liver cirrhosis (ALC) and 37 with hepatitis C virus-related cirrhosis (HCV) who underwent preoperative MRI and subsequent surgical resection or transplantation were included. For comparison groups, patients with hepatitis B virus-related cirrhosis (HBV) were included by 1:1 matching with HCV and ALC groups according to age, lesion size, and Child-Pugh classification. The imaging characteristics of background liver and focal lesions were analyzed. The diagnostic performance of LI-RADS was compared between HCV and HBV groups, and between ALC and HBV groups.

ALC group showed significantly higher frequency of hepatic steatosis (25.8 % vs. 6.1 %, p =.04) and lower frequency of nonperipheral washout on portal venous-phase in HCC (63.2 % vs. 97.1 %, p <.001) compared with HBV group. ALC group showed significantly lower sensitivity than HBV group (52.6 % vs. 88.6 %, p<.001). No significant differences in diagnostic performance were found between HCV and HBV groups. In ALC group, hepatobiliary-phase hypointensity provided significantly higher sensitivity (76.3 % vs. 52.6 %, p =.008).

The sensitivity of LI-RADS for diagnosing HCC ≤ 3.0 cm was significantly lower in the ALC group than in the HBV group.

The purpose of this study was to compare the detection rate of arterial phase hyperenhancement (APHE) in small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) between single arterial phase (single-AP) and triple hepatic arterial (triple-AP) phase MRI and between extracellular (ECA) and hepato-specific (HBA) contrast agents.

A total of 109 cirrhotic patients with 136 HCCs from seven centers were included. There were 93 men and 16 women, with a mean age of 64.0 ± 8.9 (standard deviation) years (range: 42-82 years). Each patient underwent both ECA-MRI and HBA (gadoxetic acid)-MRI examination within one month of each other. Each MRI examination was retrospectively reviewed by two readers blinded to the second MRI examination. The sensitivities of triple- and single-AP for the detection of APHE were compared, and each phase of the triple-AP sequence was compared with the other two.

No differences in APHE detection were found between single-AP (97.2%; 69/71) and triple-AP (98.5%; 64/65) (P > 0.99) at ECA-MRI. No differences in APHE detection were found between single-AP (93%; 66/71) and triple-AP (100%; 65/65) at HBA-MRI (P = 0.12). Patient age, size of the nodules, use of automatic triggering, type of contrast agent, and type of sequence were not significantly associated with APHE detection. The reader was the single variable significantly associated with APHE detection. For triple-AP, best APHE detection rate was found for early and middle-AP images compared to late-AP images (P = 0.001 and P = 0.003). All APHEs were detected with the combination of early-AP and middle-AP images, except one that was detected on late-AP images by one reader.

Our study suggests that both single- and triple-AP can be used in liver MRI for the detection of small HCC especially when using ECA. Early AP and middle-AP are the most efficient phases and should be preferred for detecting APHE, regardless of the contrast agent used.

To compare the performance of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System category 5 (LR-5) for diagnosing HCC between CT and MRI using comparative studies.

The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to April 21, 2021, to identify studies that directly compare the diagnostic performance of LR-5 for HCC between CT and MRI. A bivariate random-effects model was fitted to calculate the pooled per-observation sensitivity and specificity of LR-5 of each modality, and compare the pooled estimates of paired data. Subgroup analysis was performed according to the MRI contrast agent.

Seven studies with 1145 observations (725 HCCs) were included in the final analysis. The pooled per-observation sensitivity of LR-5 for diagnosing HCC was higher using MRI (61%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 43-76%; I² = 95%) than CT (48%; 95% CI, 31-65%; I² = 97%) (p < 0.001). The pooled per-observation specificities of LR-5 did not show statistically significant difference between CT (96%; 95% CI, 92-98%; I² = 0%) and MRI (93%; 95% CI, 88-96%; I² = 16%) (p = 0.054). In the subgroup analysis, extracellular contrast agent-enhanced MRI showed significantly higher pooled per-observation sensitivity than gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for diagnosing HCC (73% [95% CI, 55-85%] vs. 55% [95% CI, 39-70%]; p = 0.007), without a significant difference in specificity (93% [95% CI, 80-98%] vs. 94% [95% CI, 87-97%]; p = 0.884).

The LR-5 of MRI showed significantly higher pooled per-observation sensitivity than CT for diagnosing HCC. The pooled per-observation specificities of LR-5 were comparable between the two modalities.

• The pooled sensitivity of LR-5 using MRI was higher than that using CT (61% versus 48%), but the pooled specificities of LR-5 were not significantly different between CT and MRI (96% versus 93%). • Subgroup analysis according to the MRI contrast media showed a significantly higher pooled per-observation sensitivity using ECA-enhanced MRI than with EOB-enhanced MRI (73% versus 55%), and comparable specificities (93% versus 94%). • Although LI-RADS provides a common diagnostic algorithm for CT or MRI, the per-observation performance of LR-5 can be affected by the imaging modality as well as the MRI contrast agent.

Advances in magnet technologies have led to next generation 7T magnetic resonance scanners which can fit in the footprint and price point of conventional hospital scanners (1.5−3T). It is therefore worth asking if there is a role for 7T magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for the treatment of solid tumor cancers. Herein, we survey the medical literature to evaluate the unmet clinical needs for patients with pancreatic and hepatic cancer, and the potential of ultra-high field proton imaging and phosphorus spectroscopy to fulfil those needs. We draw on clinical literature, preclinical data, nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopic data of human derived samples, and the efforts to date with 7T imaging and phosphorus spectroscopy. At 7T, the imaging capabilities approach histological resolution. The spectral and spatial resolution enhancements at high field for phospholipid spectroscopy have the potential to reduce the number of exploratory surgeries due to tumor boundaries undefined at conventional field strengths. Phosphorus metabolic imaging at 7T magnetic field strength, is already a mainstay in preclinical models for molecular phenotyping, energetic status evaluation, dosimetry, and assessing treatment response for both pancreatic and liver cancers. Metabolic imaging of primary tumors and lymph nodes may provide powerful metrics to aid staging and treatment response. As tumor tissues contain extreme levels of phospholipid metabolites compared to the background signal, even spectroscopic volumes containing less than 50% tumor can be detected and/or monitored. Phosphorus spectroscopy allows non-invasive pH measurements, indicating hypoxia, as a predictor of patients likely to recur. We conclude that 7T multiparametric approaches that include metabolic imaging with phosphorus spectroscopy have the potential to meet the unmet needs of non-invasive location-specific treatment monitoring, lymph node staging, and the reduction in unnecessary surgeries for patients undergoing resections for pancreatic cancer. There is also potential for the use of 7T phosphorous spectra for the phenotyping of tumor subtypes and even early diagnosis (<2 mL). Whether or not 7T can be used for all patients within the next decade, the technology is likely to speed up the translation of new therapeutics.

Contrast-enhanced MR imaging plays an important role in the evaluation of patients with chronic liver disease, particularly for detection and characterization of liver lesions. The two most commonly used contrast agents for liver MR imaging are extracellular agents (ECAs) and hepatobiliary agents (HBAs). In patients with liver disease, the main advantage of ECA-enhanced MR imaging is its high specificity for the diagnosis of progressed HCCs. Conversely, HBAs have an additional contrast mechanism, which results in high liver-to-lesion contrast and highest sensitivity for lesion detection in the hepatobiliary phase. Emerging data suggest that features depicted on contrast-enhanced MR imaging scans are related to tumor biology and are predictive of patients' prognosis, likely to further expand the role of contrast-enhanced MR imaging in the clinical care of patients with chronic liver disease.

The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is a set of algorithms designed to provide a standardized, comprehensive framework for the interpretation of surveillance and diagnostic imaging in patients at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma. LI-RADS is the result of a multidisciplinary collaboration between radiologists, hepatologists, hepatobiliary surgeons and pathologists and has recently been incorporated into the practice guidelines for the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) and made congruent with the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) criteria. This manuscript illustrates the common ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging appearances of hepatocellular carcinoma and describes how these findings can be properly categorized using the LI-RADS system.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the first-line tool for the noninvasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with chronic liver diseases. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the performance of MRI using extracellular contrast agents (ECA-MRI) with that using gadoxetic acid (EOB-MRI) for diagnosing HCC.

We searched multiple databases for studies comparing the diagnostic performance of ECA-MRI with that of EOB-MRI in patients with suspected HCC until 31 May 2020. The bivariate random-effects model was used to pool the performance and further subgroup analysis was performed.

Eight studies were included evaluating a total of 1002 patients. ECA-MRI revealed significantly higher per-lesion sensitivity in the diagnosis of HCC than EOB-MRI did (0.76 vs 0.63, P = .002). For modified EOB-MRI (mEOB-MRI) using extended washout to the transitional phase (TP) or hepatobiliary phase (HBP), the sensitivity increased compared with that of EOB-MRI using restrictive washout in the portal venous phase (PVP) (0.74 vs 0.63, P = .07). No significant difference among the specificities of ECA-MRI, EOB-MRI, and mEOB-MRI (0.96, 0.98, and 0.93, respectively) was found. The sensitivity for lesions < 20 mm was significantly lower than that for lesions ≥ 20mm (0.66 vs 0.87, P = .01) only for ECA-MRI, which achieved higher sensitivity in Asian patients or with a 3.0 T scanner.

ECA-MRI outperforms EOB-MRI in per-lesion sensitivity for diagnosing HCC, whereas mEOB-MRI shows a trend towards improved sensitivity compared with EOB-MRI with slightly decreased specificity. Registration: Prospero CRD42020189680.