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

4 Malignant Liver Tumors
i j
Fig. 4.25 (continued)
67
4.2.4.2 Staging, Grading, andClassication
Precursor and early lesions
Two types of precursor lesions are considered as precursors
or early lesions of ICC arising from the intrahepatic large
bile ducts: at biliary intraepithelial neoplasia (BillN) and
papillary intraductal papillary neoplasms (IPN) of the bile
duct.
Grading
• Well differentiated
• Moderately differentiated
• Poorly differentiated
TNM classication
Tumor classication depends on the number of lesions, vascular invasion, intrahepatic metastasis, and invasion of adjacent structures.
• T0: No evidence of primary tumor
• T1: Tumor is solitary without vascular invasion
• T2: Multiple tumors (e.g., multifocal disease, satellitosis,
and intrahepatic metastasis) with vascular invasion
• T3: Tumor directly invades adjacent structures
• T4: Tumor with any periductal inltrating component
• N0: No regional lymph nodes metastasis
• N1: Hilar, periduodenal, and peripancreatic lymph nodes
metastases
• M0: No distant metastasis
• M1: Distant metastases
4.2.5 Clinical Issues
4.2.5.1 Presentation
ICC is a relatively rare malignancy (accounting for 5–15% of
primary liver cancers). Patients with ICC are usually elderly,
with a slight male dominance. Etiology of most cases of ICC
is not clear, and some cases of ICC are associated with
chronic biliary inammatory, primary sclerosing cholangitis,
hepatolithiasis, parasitic biliary infestation, biliary malformations, familial polyposis, congenital hepatic brosis, or
other risk factors. Clinical symptoms and signs of ICC are
often not specic and related to the site of the tumor in the
liver, its growth pattern, and the presence of obstruction of
biliary tracts. Patients are usually asymptomatic in early
stages. ICC without central bile ducts obstruction often
attains a large size without being noticed. In advanced stages,
patients may present abdominal distension or pain, weight
loss, hepatomegaly, or palpable abdominal mass. Biliary
tract obstruction is relatively rare, while perihilar cholangiocarcinoma usually presents with cholestasis and cholangitis
of the intrahepatic bile ducts [14, 28].
4.2.5.2 Prognosis
ICC is an aggressive cancer with high mortality and poor
survival rate as a result of early invasion, widespread metastases, and without effective treatments. The 5-year survival
rate after operation is 69% in patients with the intraductalgrowth type, and 39% in patients with the mass-forming
type. The periductal inltrating type shows a poor prognosis.
The following factors are associated with a poor prognosis:
concomitant hepatolithiasis; lymph node spread, macro-

68
Y. Dong et al.
a
c
b
d
e
Fig. 4.26 Tumor residual after transarterial chemoembolization
(TACE) in a 56-year-old man with hepatitis B-related cirrhosis.
Grayscale US image obtained 1 month after TACE shows a typical heterogeneous treatment lesion (a). No color ow signal could be detected
inside the lesion (b). CEUS image obtained 38s after contrast agent
f
injection shows a nodular region of APHE (arrows) within the treatment
site (c). CEUS image obtained at portal venous (d) and late phase (e)
showed the hypoenhancement as wash-out. Also, the hyperenhanced
nodular could be detected on 3D-CEUS (f)

a
4 Malignant Liver Tumors
69
b
c
e f
d
g h
Fig. 4.27 Tumor residual after transarterial chemoembolization
(TACE) in a 56-year-old man with hepatitis B-related cirrhosis.
Grayscale US image obtained 1 month after TACE shows a typical heterogeneous treatment lesion (a). No color ow signal could be detected
inside the lesion (b). CEUS image obtained 38s after contrast agent
injection shows a nodular region of APHE (arrows) within the treatment
site (c). CEUS image obtained at portal venous (d) and late phase (e)
showed the hypoenhancement as wash-out. Also, the hyperenhanced
nodular could be detected on 3D-CEUS (f)

70
Y. Dong et al.
a
c
b
d
e
Fig. 4.28 A case of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) with massforming type. A grayscale image revealed an expansile mass with illdened border under the capsule of the right lobe of liver (a). Color
ow imaging showed abundant and branched blood signal inside the
lesion (b). Arterial Doppler spectrum with high resistance index (RI) as
0.93 was measured (c). The lesion showed branched and peripheral rim-
f
like hyperenhancement in the arterial phase (d, e), and rapidly marked
wash-out at 28s (f) with distinct hypoenhancement in the late phase (g).
The diagnosis of ICC was conrmed with pathology after surgical
resection. Macroscopic features of ICC showed that the periphery of the
lesion contained abundant, proliferating cells, and the center of the
lesion was more sclerotic and hypocellular) (h)

4 Malignant Liver Tumors
71
g
Fig. 4.28 (continued)
a
h
b
c
Fig. 4.29 A case of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) with intraductal growth type. A grayscale ultrasound image revealed a polypoid
nodule (arrow) within the dilated left hepatic duct (a). The lesion within
the dilated left hepatic duct showed slightly hyperenhancement (arrow)
d
in arterial phase and gradual enhancement. Localized dilated affected
ducts were clearly presented with non-enhancement (arrowhead) (b–e).
The lesion showed mild wash-out at 63s (f) and explicitly in the late
phase (g) (arrow)

72
Y. Dong et al.
e
f
g
Fig. 4.29 (continued)
scopic vascular invasion, positive surgical margins, intrahepatic metastasis, macroscopic vascular invasion, non-curative
resection, advanced TNM stage, poor histological differentiation, squamous cell or sarcomatous elements, and mucin
phenotype [14, 28].
4.2.5.3 Treatment
Surgical operation is the unique potentially radical treatment. Few patients have chances for surgical resection as
many patients present with advanced disease stage.
Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), ablation, and liver
transplantation are not recommended for patients with ICC
because of uncertain curative effects. Current researches
suggest that chemotherapy may be of benet to patients with
margin invasion and/or nodes metastases after surgical resection or with distant metastases [14, 26–28].
4.3 Liver Metastases
Wen-PingWangHan-ShengXia, and Jia-YingCao
4.3.1 Terminology
Focal or diffuse malignant involvement of the liver from
extrahepatic origins is termed as liver metastases, which
are 18–40 times more common than primary liver tumors.
The liver is one of the most common organs for metastasis.
The complex dual blood supply mode facilitates the inow
of cancer cells from tumors of other organs and distinct
microenvironment of sinusoids permits increased trapping
of tumor cells, thus supporting the development and invasion of metastases. The early and exact detection of liver

4 Malignant Liver Tumors
73
a
c
b
d
e
Fig. 4.30 A case of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) with intraductal growth type. A grayscale ultrasound image revealed a papillary
mural nodule within the left hepatic duct (arrow), and adjacent bile duct
was invaded (arrowheads) (a). Color ow imaging showed blood signal
inside the lesion (b). Arterial Doppler spectrum with high resistance
index (RI) as 0.80 was measured (c). The lesion showed peripheral
f
branched hyperenhancement in the arterial phase (arrow) (d, e). The
lesion showed mild wash-out at 54s (f) and explicitly in the portal
venous phase (arrow) (g). A distant metastasis in the muscular layer of
the left lower abdomen was detected and conrmed by biopsy pathology (arrow) (h, i)

74
hi
Y. Dong et al.
g
Fig. 4.30 (continued)
metastases is crucial for clinical decision-making and
patient management.
frequent B mode ultrasound feature of liver metastasis, which
can also appear as a target sign or “bull’s eye” sign owing to
alternating layers of hyperechoic and hypoechoic tissue
(Fig.4.36). However, such morphologic changes are non-spe-
4.3.2 Imaging Features
4.3.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
Conventional ultrasound is the rst-line modality for hepatic
imaging. It is widely used in routine surveillance, follow-up
scanning, and treatment assessment of patients with liver metastases. Most liver metastases occur in normal liver. On US,
metastases commonly present as multifocal solid lesions with
hypo-, iso-, hyperechoic, or mixed echogenicity depending on
the tissue components of the primary tumor and on the presence
of necrosis or calcication. Grossly, small lesions may be welldened hypoechoic nodules; whereas, large lesions are more
likely to have heterogeneous echotexture with barely visible
margins (Fig.4.35). A peripheral hypoechoic halo is the most
cic, especially in lesions smaller than 1cm [29].
4.3.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
With the aid of microbubbles, contrast ratio between liver
parenchyma and focal lesions is greatly increased at contrast
enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), which can not only stand out
the occult lesions on conventional US, but also be more sensitive for small metastases. Moreover, CEUS is a real-time
procedure with better temporal and spatial resolution than
contrast-enhanced CT or MRI. It is better able to detect
hemodynamic changes and detailed vascular information of
hepatic tumors regardless of their rate of perfusion, rendering it an excellent tool for detection and characterization of
liver metastases [30].

ef
4 Malignant Liver Tumors
75
a
c
b
d
g
Fig. 4.31 A case of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) with periductal inltrating type. A grayscale image revealed a solid mass, adjacent to hepatic hilum, with ill-dened border extending along the
intrahepatic bile ducts (arrows) (a). The upstream ducts were secondarily dilated and adjacent bile ducts were invaded (b). The lesion
showed heterogeneously enhancement in the arterial phase and gradually enhancement (arrows) (c–e). The lesion showed partly mild washout at 102 s (f) and completely in the late phase (g) (arrow). The
upstream secondarily dilated ducts were clearly observed with nonenhancement (arrowheads)

76
ab
cd
g
Y. Dong et al.
e
Fig. 4.32 A case of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) with massforming type. B mode ultrasound revealed a hypoechoic mass under the
capsule of the right lobe of liver (a). Color ow imaging showed a
short-linear blood signal inside the lesion (b). Arterial Doppler spectrum with high resistance index (RI) as 0.74 was measured (c). The
lesion showed peripheral rim-like and gradually centripetal hyperenhancement in arterial phase (d–f). The lesion showed mild wash-out in
f
the portal venous phase (g, h) and completely in the late phase (i). On
MRI, the lesion showed hypointense on T1-weighted imaging (j) and
hyperintense on T2-weighted imaging (k). On dynamic enhanced MRI,
the lesion showed arterial phase peripheral enhancement followed by
progressive and concentric lling in (l–n). The lesion was conrmed by
surgical pathology (o)
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
