Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5762_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Preface
- •Contents
- •1.1 Historical Remarks
- •1.1.1 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound
- •2.2 Machine Settings
- •1.4 CEUS Phases
- •1.8 Three-Dimensional (3D) CEUS
- •1.9 CEUS Guidelines
- •References
- •2.1 Introduction
- •2.2.2 Image Depth Penetration
- •2.2.3 Focus
- •2.2.5 Background Signal (Noise)
- •2.2.6 Dynamic Range
- •2.2.7 Frame Rate
- •2.6 Artifacts
- •2.6.1 Long Liver Enhancement
- •2.7 Safety
- •References
- •3.1 Introduction
- •3.7 Detection by Intraoperative Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound (IO-CEUS)
- •References
- •4: Malignant Liver Tumors
- •4.1 Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- •4.1.1 Introduction
- •4.1.6 Surveillance
- •4.1.7 CEUS LI-RADS
- •4.1.8 Small HCC
- •4.1.9 Treatment Response Follow Up
- •4.1.9.1 Ablation Therapy
- •4.1.9.2 Transarterial Chemoembolization
- •4.1.9.3 Targeted Therapy
- •4.2 Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma
- •4.2.2 Imaging
- •4.2.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •4.2.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •4.2.2.3 CT Findings
- •4.2.2.4 MRI Findings
- •4.2.2.5 Other Imaging Findings
- •4.2.2.6 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •4.2.3.1 Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- •4.2.4 Pathology
- •4.2.4.1 General Features
- •4.2.5 Clinical Issues
- •4.2.5.1 Presentation
- •4.2.5.2 Prognosis
- •4.2.5.3 Treatment
- •4.3 Liver Metastases
- •4.3.1 Terminology
- •4.3.2 Imaging Features
- •4.3.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •4.3.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •4.3.2.3 CT Findings
- •4.3.2.4 MRI Findings
- •4.3.3.1 Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- •4.3.3.2 Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma
- •4.3.3.3 Focal Fatty Liver Change
- •4.4 Dysplasia Nodules
- •4.4.1 Terminology
- •4.4.2 Imaging
- •4.4.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •4.4.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •4.4.2.3 CT Findings
- •4.4.2.4 MRI Findings
- •4.4.2.5 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •4.4.4 Pathology
- •4.4.4.1 General Features
- •4.4.5 Clinical Issues
- •4.4.5.1 Presentation
- •4.4.5.2 Prognosis
- •4.4.5.3 Treatment
- •References
- •5: Benign Liver Tumors
- •5.1 Hepatic Hemangioma
- •5.1.1 Terminology
- •5.1.2 Imaging
- •5.1.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •5.1.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •5.1.2.3 CT Findings
- •5.1.2.4 MRI Findings
- •5.1.2.5 Other Imaging Findings
- •5.1.2.6 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •5.1.3.1 Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- •5.1.3.2 Metastatic Hepatic Carcinoma
- •5.1.3.3 Focal Angiosarcoma
- •5.1.3.4 Abscess
- •5.1.3.5 Hepatic Adenoma
- •5.1.4 Pathology
- •5.1.4.1 General Features
- •5.1.5 Clinical Issues
- •5.1.5.1 Presentation
- •5.1.5.2 Prognosis
- •5.1.5.3 Treatment
- •5.2 Focal Nodular Hyperplasia
- •5.2.1 Terminology
- •5.2.2 Imaging
- •5.2.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •5.2.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •5.2.2.3 CT Findings
- •5.2.2.4 MRI Findings
- •5.2.2.5 Other Imaging Findings
- •5.2.2.6 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •5.2.3.1 Hepatic Adenoma
- •5.2.3.2 Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- •5.2.3.3 Fibrolamellar Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- •5.2.4 Pathology
- •5.2.4.1 General Features
- •5.2.5 Clinical Issues
- •5.2.5.1 Prognosis
- •5.2.5.2 Treatment
- •5.3 Hepatocellular Adenoma
- •5.3.1 Terminology
- •5.3.2 Imaging
- •5.3.2.1 Ultrasonographic Findings
- •5.3.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •5.3.2.3 CT Findings
- •5.3.2.4 MRI Findings
- •5.3.2.5 Imaging Recommendations
- •5.3.3.1 Focal Nodular Hyperplasia
- •5.3.3.2 Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- •5.3.3.3 Fibrolamellar Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- •5.3.3.4 Hepatic Hemangioma
- •5.3.4 Pathology
- •5.3.4.1 General Features
- •5.3.5 Clinical Issues
- •5.3.5.1 Presentation
- •5.3.5.2 Complications
- •5.4.1 Terminology
- •5.4.2 Imaging
- •5.4.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •5.4.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •5.4.2.3 CT Findings
- •5.4.2.4 MRI Findings
- •5.4.2.5 Other Imaging Findings
- •5.4.2.6 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •5.4.3.1 Hepatocellular Carcinomas
- •5.4.3.2 Metastases
- •5.4.3.3 Hemangioma
- •5.4.4 Pathology
- •5.4.4.1 General Features
- •5.4.5 Clinical Issues
- •5.4.5.1 Presentation
- •5.4.5.2 Prognosis
- •5.4.5.3 Treatment
- •References
- •6: Rare Malignant Liver Tumors
- •6.1 Hepatic Lymphoma
- •6.1.1 Terminology
- •6.1.2 Imaging
- •6.1.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •6.1.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •6.1.2.3 CT Findings
- •6.1.2.4 MRI Findings
- •6.1.2.5 Other Imaging Findings
- •6.1.2.6 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •6.1.4 Pathology
- •6.1.4.1 General Features
- •6.1.5 Clinical Issue
- •6.1.5.1 Presentation
- •6.1.5.2 Prognosis
- •6.1.5.3 Treatment
- •6.2.1 Terminology
- •6.2.2 Imaging
- •6.2.2.1 General Features
- •6.2.2.2 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •6.2.2.3 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •6.2.2.4 CT Findings
- •6.2.2.5 MRI Findings
- •6.2.2.6 Other Imaging Findings
- •6.2.2.7 Imaging Recommendations
- •6.2.4 Pathology
- •6.2.4.1 General Features
- •6.2.5 Clinical Issues
- •6.2.5.1 Presentation
- •6.2.5.2 Prognosis
- •6.2.5.3 Treatment
- •6.3.1 Terminology
- •6.3.2 Imaging
- •6.3.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •6.3.2.3 Computed Tomography Findings
- •6.3.2.4 Magnetic Resonance Imaging Findings
- •6.3.2.5 Nuclear Medicine Findings
- •6.3.2.6 Imaging Recommendations
- •6.3.3.1 Focal Nodular Hyperplasia
- •6.3.3.2 Hepatocarcinoma
- •6.3.3.4 Hepatoadenoma
- •6.3.3.5 Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma
- •6.3.4 Pathology
- •6.3.4.1 General Features
- •6.3.5 Clinical Issues
- •6.3.5.1 Presentation
- •6.3.5.2 Prognosis
- •6.3.5.3 Treatment
- •6.4 Hepatic Biliary Cystadenocarcinoma
- •6.4.1 Terminology
- •6.4.2 Imaging
- •6.4.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •6.4.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •6.4.2.3 CT Findings
- •6.4.2.4 MRI Findings
- •6.4.2.5 Other Imaging Findings
- •6.4.2.6 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •6.4.3.1 Hepatic Biliary Cystadenoma
- •6.4.3.2 Simple Hepatic Cysts
- •6.4.3.3 Hemorrhagic Hepatic Cysts
- •6.4.3.4 Metastatic Tumor
- •6.4.3.5 Hepatic Abscesses
- •6.4.3.6 Hydatid Disease
- •6.4.3.9 Mesenchymal Hamartoma
- •6.4.4 Pathology
- •6.4.4.1 General Features
- •6.4.5 Clinical Issues
- •6.4.5.1 Presentation
- •6.4.5.2 Prognosis
- •6.4.5.3 Treatment
- •6.5 Neuroendocrine Neoplasm
- •6.5.1 Terminology
- •6.5.2 Image
- •6.5.2.1 Ultrasonographic Findings
- •6.5.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •6.5.2.3 CT Findings
- •6.5.2.4 MR Findings
- •6.5.2.5 Other Imaging Finding
- •6.5.2.6 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •6.5.3.1 Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- •6.5.3.2 Metastatic Hepatic Carcinoma
- •6.5.4 Pathology
- •6.5.4.1 General Features
- •6.5.5 Clinical Issues
- •6.5.5.1 Presentation
- •6.5.5.2 Prognosis
- •6.5.5.3 Treatment
- •6.6.1 Terminology
- •6.6.2 Imaging
- •6.6.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •6.6.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •6.6.2.3 CT Findings
- •6.6.2.4 MRI Findings
- •6.6.2.5 PET/CT Findings
- •6.6.2.6 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •6.6.3.1 Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- •6.6.3.2 Cholangiocarcinoma
- •6.6.3.3 Metastatic Liver Cancer
- •6.6.4 Pathology
- •6.6.5 Clinical Issues
- •References
- •7: Rare Benign Liver Tumors
- •7.1 Hepatic Angiomyolipoma
- •7.1.1 Terminology
- •7.1.2 Imaging
- •7.1.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •7.1.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •7.1.2.3 CT Findings
- •7.1.2.4 MRI Findings
- •7.1.2.5 Other Imaging Findings
- •7.1.2.6 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •7.1.4 Pathology
- •7.1.4.1 General Features
- •7.1.5 Clinical Issues
- •7.1.5.1 Presentation
- •7.1.5.2 Prognosis
- •7.1.5.3 Treatment
- •7.2 Hepatic Biliary Cystadenoma
- •7.2.1 Terminology
- •7.2.2 Imaging
- •7.2.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •7.2.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Features
- •7.2.2.3 CT Findings
- •7.2.2.4 MRI Findings
- •7.2.2.5 Other Imaging Findings
- •7.2.2.6 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •7.2.3.1 Hepatic Biliary Cystadenocarcinoma
- •7.2.3.2 Simple Hepatic Cyst
- •7.2.3.3 Hemorrhagic Hepatic Cysts
- •7.2.3.4 Metastatic Tumor
- •7.2.3.5 Hepatic Abscesses
- •7.2.3.6 Hydatid Disease
- •7.2.3.9 Mesenchymal Hamartoma
- •7.2.4 Pathology
- •7.2.4.1 General Features
- •7.2.5 Clinical Issues
- •7.2.5.1 Presentation
- •7.2.5.2 Prognosis
- •7.2.5.3 Treatment
- •References
- •8: Hepatic Parasitosis
- •8.1 Terminology
- •8.1.1 Echinococcosis
- •8.1.2 Amebiasis
- •8.1.3 Schistosomiasis
- •8.2 Imaging
- •8.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •8.2.1.1 Echinococcosis
- •8.2.1.2 Amebiasis
- •8.2.1.3 Schistosomiasis
- •8.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •8.2.2.1 Echinococcosis
- •8.2.3 CT Findings
- •8.2.3.1 Echinococcosis
- •8.2.3.2 Amebiasis
- •8.2.3.3 Schistosomiasis
- •8.2.4 MRI Findings
- •8.2.4.1 Echinococcosis
- •8.2.4.2 Amebiasis
- •8.2.4.3 Schistosomiasis
- •8.2.5 Other Imaging Findings
- •8.2.5.1 Echinococcosis
- •8.2.6 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •8.2.6.1 Echinococcosis
- •8.2.6.2 Amebiasis
- •8.2.6.3 Schistosomiasis
- •8.3 Pathology
- •8.3.1 General features
- •8.3.1.1 Echinococcosis
- •8.3.1.2 Amebiasis
- •8.3.2.1 Echinococcosis
- •8.4 Clinical Issues
- •8.4.1 Presentation
- •8.4.1.1 Echinococcosis
- •8.4.1.2 Amebic Liver Abscess
- •8.4.1.3 Schistosomiasis
- •8.4.2 Prognosis
- •8.4.2.1 Echinococcosis
- •8.4.2.2 Amebiasis
- •8.4.2.3 Schistosomiasis
- •8.4.3 Treatment
- •8.4.3.1 Echinococcosis
- •8.4.3.2 Amebiasis
- •8.4.3.3 Schistosomiasis
- •References
- •9: Hepatic Inflammatory Pseudotumor
- •9.1 Terminology
- •9.2 Imaging
- •9.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •9.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •9.2.3 CT Findings
- •9.2.4 MRI Findings
- •9.2.5 Other Imaging Findings
- •9.2.6 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •9.3.1 Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- •9.3.2 Liver Metastasis Tumor
- •9.3.3 Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma
- •9.3.4 Liver Abscess
- •9.4 Pathology
- •9.4.1 General Features
- •9.5 Clinical Issues
- •9.5.1 Presentation
- •9.5.2 Prognosis
- •9.5.3 Treatment
- •References
- •10: Hepatic Artery Aneurysm
- •10.1 Terminology
- •10.2 Hepatic Artery Aneurysm
- •10.3 Imaging
- •10.3.1 General Features
- •10.3.2 Radiographic Findings
- •10.3.3 DSA Findings
- •10.3.4 CT Findings
- •10.3.5 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •10.3.7 MRI Findings
- •10.3.8 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •10.3.9 Protocol Advice
- •10.5 Pathology
- •10.5.1 General Features
- •10.6 Clinical Issues
- •10.6.1 Presentation
- •10.6.2 Prognosis
- •10.6.3 Treatment
- •References
- •11: Peliosis Hepatis
- •11.1 Terminology
- •11.2 Imaging
- •11.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
- •11.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
- •11.2.3 CT Findings
- •11.2.4 MRI Findings
- •11.2.5 Other Imaging Findings
- •11.2.6 Best Imaging Protocol Advices
- •11.3.1 Hepatic Adenoma
- •11.3.2 Hemangioma
- •11.3.3 Focal Nodular Hyperplasia
- •11.3.4 Hepatic Abscess
- •11.3.5 Hypervascular Metastases
- •11.3.6 Hepatocellular Carcinoma
- •11.3.7 Arteriovenous Malformations
- •11.4 Pathology
- •11.4.1 General Features
- •11.5 Clinical Issues
- •11.5.1 Presentation
- •11.5.2 Prognosis
- •11.5.3 Treatment
- •References
- •12.1 Introduction
- •12.8 Summary
- •References
- •References
- •14.1 Introduction
- •14.2 Indications
- •14.3 Equipment
- •14.4 3D-CEUS Procedures
- •14.5 Clinical Application
- •References
- •15: Future Prospects
- •15.2 Improved Liver Metastasis Detection (Sonazoid)
- •References

5 Benign Liver Tumors
127
a
c
b
d
e
Fig. 5.21 A 49-year-old man with β-catenin-activated hepatocellular
adenoma (HCA). The hypoechoic lesion was located in the right hepatic
lobe on B mode ultrasound (a). Perilesional blood ow signals were
detected (b). On contrast enhanced ultrasound, the lesion demonstrated
f
heterogeneously diffuse hyperenhancement in early arterial phase (c–
e). The feeding artery could be observed clearly. The lesion was
hypoenhancement in both portal venous and late phases (f, g)

128
ab
g
Fig. 5.21 (continued)
J.-Y. Cao et al.
c
Fig. 5.22 A 46-year-old man with surgically proved inammatory
hepatocellular adenoma (HCA). The lesion was hypoechoic on B mode
ultrasound (a). Rim-like blood ow signals were detected in the perilesional area (b). The lesion was soft on ultrasonic elastography (c). On
contrast enhanced ultrasound, the lesion demonstrated complete homo-
d
geneous hyperenhancement in arterial phase (d–f). It was isoenhanced
in both portal venous and late phases (g, h). Time intensity curve could
reect the intensity change of the lesion (i). It was conrmed by pathology after surgery (j)

ij
5 Benign Liver Tumors
129
e
g
f
h
Fig. 5.22 (continued)
a
b
Fig. 5.23 A case of small hyperechoic hepatocellular adenoma (HCA)
lesion. The lesion was near the surface of right hepatic lobe (a). It was
more clear on high-frequency ultrasound images. Branched color ow
signals were detected in the lesion (b). It showed complete hyperenhancement during arterial phase (c–f). It showed mild wash-out in portal venous and late phases (g, h)

130
J.-Y. Cao et al.
c
e
d
f
g
Fig. 5.23 (continued)
h

cd
5 Benign Liver Tumors
131
a
b
e
f
g
Fig. 5.24 A case of hepatocellular adenoma with hemorrhage in a
27-year-old woman. B mode ultrasound showing a hypoechoic lesion
with unclear boundary in the right lobe of the liver (a). Spotty hyperechoic calcication can be observed inside the lesion (b). Color ow
signals could be detected inside the lesion (c). Arterial Doppler spectrum with resistance index (RI) as 0.53 was measured (d). The lesion
was heterogeneously enhanced with a bulky and tortuous artery under
the capsule during arterial phase on contrast enhanced ultrasound (e–g).
h
Isoenhancement was observed in portal venous phase (h) and intratumoral hypoechoic areas were detected in late phase (i).
Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) showing multi lowdensity areas inner nodule (j). Gross specimen showed hemorrhage
change of the whole lesion (k) and low-power photomicrograph (hematoxylin–eosin staining; original magnication ×20) showed multiple
hemorrhagic areas and dilated sinusoidal spaces (l)

132
ij
J.-Y. Cao et al.
kl
Fig. 5.24 (continued)
• Contrast studies
– T1 C+ (Gad)
On the dynamic postcontrast sequence, adenomas
contrast-enhanced imaging study such as CT or MRI
may be applied to provide more diagnostic
information.
show early arterial enhancement and become nearly
isointense about liver on delayed images.
Some reports suggest that the enhancement
5.3.3 Dierential Diagnosis
becomes isointense to the rest of the liver by 1min.
– T1 C+ (hepatocyte-specic)
Adenomas usually appear hypointense on hepatobiliary phase (20min after injection) due to reduced
uptake of Gd-EOB-DTPA/Eovist (cf. FNH which
appears iso- to hyperintense).
5.3.3.1 Focal Nodular Hyperplasia
• HCA and FNH are best distinguished with immunohistochemical stains for glutamine synthetase and inammatory proteins, such as SAA or CRP.
• Combination of the CEUS and CDFI techniques can help
to reveal the real-time ow signals of the lesions and
5.3.2.5 Imaging Recommendations
• Best imaging tool
– HCAs are usually detected by imaging, typically by
abdominal ultrasound or CT scan.
– The ultrasound is always considered to be the rst
choice because of its safety, availability and low cost.
– Sometimes, the ultrasonic images of lesions of HCA
may appear similar to other several liver tumors such
as FNH or HCC.In this kind of situation, a multi-phase
detect the subcapsular feeding artery [21–23].
– FNH is usually observed hyperenhanced in arterial and
portal venous phases in more than 90% of cases.
– The arterial enhancement is typically central (60–70%)
or eccentric (<20%) with centrifugal lling patterns.
– In larger FNHs (>6 cm), more than one central or
peripherally supplying artery can be identied.
• MRI scan is also a good way to differentiate FNH from
HCA [17].

5 Benign Liver Tumors
133
– T2WI: Bright central scars show late enhancement.
– Retains hepatocyte-specic contrast material [e.g.,
Eovist (gadoxetate)] on delayed phase MRI.
5.3.3.2 Hepatocellular Carcinoma
• Rapid wash-out.
• Rim enhancement of the pseudocapsule may be observed
on the late-phase images of CT/MRI.
• Different demographics.
• May be difcult to distinguish from an adenoma if
well-differentiated.
5.3.3.3 Fibrolamellar Hepatocellular Carcinoma
• Radiating/central scar.
• Calcication more common [18].
• Lymph node enlargement common.
5.3.3.4 Hepatic Hemangioma
• Ultrasonic images of hemangiomas typically appear as
well-dened hyperechoic lesions with a small proportion
(10%) of hypoechoic region (which may be due to a background of hepatic steatosis, where the liver parenchyma is
of increased echogenicity).
• On dynamic CT and MRI using conventional ECF agents,
a hemangioma may show typically peripheral nodular
enhancement in arterial phase with centripetal and prolonged enhancement [17].
protein seem to express higher, which are all classic
indicators of the acute phase response.
– HNF1α-inactivated HCA (H-HCA): Characterized by
a downregulation of the liver fatty acid-binding protein
(LFABP, which is caused by inactivating mutations of
the HNF-1α gene.); rare malignant progression would
happen in this phenotype, which is not apparent in the
other HCA subtypes.
– β-Catenin activated HCA (b-HCA): Dened by acti-
vating mutations of β-catenin that resist
phosphorylation- mediated downregulation by the
GSKB/APC/AXIN complex.
– Unclassied HCA (UHCA): The genetic mutation of
them still remains unclear or unclassied.
5.3.5 Clinical Issues
5.3.5.1 Presentation
• The clinical presentation is various due to the size of
tumor and the location it occurs.
• Many HCA patients usually have no symptoms, with normal liver function test results and no specic detection of
serum tumor markers such as α-fetoprotein [23].
• Few patients may suffer from slightly abdominal pain
with nausea, poor appetite or other digestive disorder
symptoms [23].
5.3.4 Pathology
5.3.4.1 General Features
• In the examination of biopsy or resection specimens
stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E), a HCA lesion
is characterized by scattered thin-walled vascular channels within the mass and the absence of portal and central
veins and bile ducts or connective tissue [16].
• Depending on the several subtypes of HCA, different
degrees of hepatocyte steatosis, inammatory cells, bile
duct proliferation, hemorrhage, or dystrophic blood vessels may be present.
5.3.4.2 Staging, Grading, andClassication
• The classication of HCA [22]
• Four distinct subtypes of HCA are recognized as inammatory HCA, HNF1α-inactivated HCA, β-catenin activated HCA, and unclassied HCA. In these different
subtypes, several genetic mutations are identied, resulting in benign proliferation of hepatocytes and in some
HCA, malignant transformation.
– Inammatory HCA (IHCA): Both serum and lesion
indicators of IHCA patients show active inammatory
response. The markers serum amyloid A and C- reactive
5.3.5.2 Complications
Common complications of HCA include lesion rupture,
hemorrhage, and malignant transformation [16].
• Lesion Rupture and Hemorrhage
• Are the most important complications, which can cause
hypovolemic shock or even death.
• Common risks are increasing tumor sizes (≥4cm), subcapsular location, and long duration of contraceptive
use.
• Most common presentations are severe abdominal pain
and hemodynamic disorders, or even hypovolemic shock.
• Malignant transformation
• Previous reports showed that HCA may have possibility
to transform from benign to malignant (8–13%).
• It still remains unclear whether the origin of malignant
tissue comes from HCA lesion or periphery hepatic
tissue.
5.3.5.3 Prognosis, Treatment, andSurveillance
The natural prognosis and indication for surgical treatment
and surveillance are not well reported.
• For symptomatic patients and/or lesions ≥5 cm (which
have a higher risk of rupture or hemorrhage.

134
J.-Y. Cao et al.
• Surgical (laparoscopic) resection or enucleation could be
considered if necessary.
• In cases of multiple lesions, resection of the largest tumor
and close follow-up of the remaining lesions are considered as a possible management of choice.
• Embolization can be performed if hemorrhage occurs.
• For asymptomatic patients with smaller lesions
(<5cm).
• Conservative therapy should be a better choice.
• Sometimes, HCAs can regress spontaneously while withdrawing oral contraceptives or having dietary for glycogen storage diseases.
5.4 Focal Fatty Inltration
YiDong, Pei-liFan, and Wen-PingWang
5.4.1 Terminology
Denitions
• Focal fatty infiltration (FFI) is a form of fatty liver disease. Obesity, atherogenic dyslipidemia, arterial
hypertension (metabolic syndrome), insulin resistance, and glucose intolerance could lead to overnutrition in liver, particularly in genetically predisposed
individuals [24].
• FFI occurs in a local area of the liver, showing focal or
patchy mass-like appearance on images.
• It is classied into focal steatosis and focal steatosis spare.
5.4.2 Imaging
5.4.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
• Focal steatosis usually shows as a homogeneously hyperechoic irregular area with slight posterior acoustic attenuation (Fig.5.25) but focal steatosis spare could appear as
hypoechoic mass (Fig.5.26).
• Both focal steatosis and focal steatosis spare are absent of
hypoechoic halo.
• They have well-dened margins with irregular shapes.
• FFIs are mostly located in the medial segment of the left
liver lobe close to the falciform ligament (Fig.5.25), the
gallbladder bed (Fig.5.26), the forepart of segment I, and
the back of segment IV [25].
5.4.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
• FFIs show arterial phase isoenhancement and persists in
all phases on CEUS (Figs.5.25 and 5.26).
• Several studies found that some focal steatosis lesions
have a delayed enhancement, and show hypoenhancement in the arterial phase then become isoenhancement
gradually in the portal venous and late phases.
• Several focal steatosis spare lesions show hyperenhancement in all phases on CEUS due to fatty cell-induced
exclusion and constriction of blood vessels [26].
5.4.2.3 CT Findings
• FFIs usually appear as typical homogeneous hypoattenuating lesions on CT images.
• The degree of hypoattenuation depends on the amount of
fat inside the lesion. The density of focal fatty inltration
a
Fig. 5.25 Features of focal steatosis on B mode ultrasound and contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). B mode ultrasound revealed a
homogeneously hyperechoic and irregular-shaped mass in the medial
segment of the left liver lobe, close to the falciform ligament (arrow)
(a). Color ow imaging showed no blood signal inside the lesion (b).
b
The lesion showed isoenhancement in all phases on CEUS (arrow) (c–
h). A homogeneously hypoattenuating lesion on non-contrast CT
(arrow) (i). On dynamic contrast enhanced CT, the lesion showed nonenhancement in arterial phase and hypoenhancement in portal venous
and late phases (arrow) (j, k)

5 Benign Liver Tumors
135
c
e
d
f
g
Fig. 5.25 (continued)
h

136
ij
J.-Y. Cao et al.
k
Fig. 5.25 (continued)
a
b
Fig. 5.26 Features of focal fatty inltration (FFI) on grayscale ultrasound and contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). B mode ultrasound
revealed a hypoechoic mass in the medial segment of the liver, close to
the gallbladder bed (arrow) (a). CDFI showed portal venous blood signal around the lesion (b). The lesion showed isoenhancement in all
phases on CEUS (arrow) (c–f)
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
