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

ij
kl
4 Malignant Liver Tumors
77
h
Fig. 4.32 (continued)

78
mn
Y. Dong et al.
o
Fig. 4.32 (continued)
Typical appearances of liver metastases on CEUS are as
follows:
Arterial phase features
Almost all liver metastases show obvious arterial phase
enhancement. Generally, there are two enhancement patterns: diffuse homogeneous or heterogeneous hyperenhancement and peripheral rim-like hyperenhancement (Figs.4.37,
4.38, 4.39, 4.40, 4.41, and 4.42). These patterns are not asso-
ciated with the degree of tumor vascularity but may be
related to nodule size: diffuse hypervascularity is seen more
commonly in the lesions smaller than 2 cm, while hepatic
metastases larger than 5 cm are more likely to show pronounced rim-like peripheral hyperenhancement [31]. The
period for arterial phase enhancement of hepatic metastases
is transient and lasts only about 20s in most cases, which can
only be depicted on CEUS and would not be appreciated on
CT or MRI imaging. Although such arterial hypervascularity
is not specic and provides limited clues for characterization
purpose, it may be useful in the treatment response assess-
ment of metastases after local ablation or chemotherapy
(Fig.4.43).
Portal venous and late phase CEUS features
Liver metastases typically present hypoenhancement during
the portal venous and late phases after microbubble injection. Rapid and complete wash-out is an invariable evident
feature of hepatic metastasis on CEUS.The mass starts to
wash-out within 60s after contrast injection in most cases,
and the wash-out onset of some small lesions (≤2cm) even
begins in the late arterial phase (about 20s after injection).
The optimal temporal window to detect metastatic lesions is
the early portal venous phase, namely from 40 to 60s after
contrast injection, which provides the best lesion conspicuity. Although hypervascular metastases including neuroendocrine tumors, melanomas, sarcomas, and renal, breast and
thyroid neoplasms frequently show a signicantly longer
wash-out time than hypovascular metastases, virtually
almost all metastases unequivocally show complete washout after 60s and remain constant hypoenhancement in the

4 Malignant Liver Tumors
79
a
c
b
d
e
Fig. 4.33 A case of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) with massforming type. B mode ultrasound revealed a hypoechoic mass around
the right portal vein (a). Color ow imaging showed no blood signal
inside the lesion (b). The lesion showed centrifugal hyperenhancement
f
in the arterial phase (c–f). The lesion showed mild wash-out at 82s (g)
and distinct hypoenhancement in the late phase (h). Gross specimen
showed the lesion around the right portal vein (i)

80
g
hi
Y. Dong et al.
Fig. 4.33 (continued)
late phase. Marked wash-out is dened as punched out perfusion defects or black hole within 2min after contrast injection. It should be noted that if a hypoenhanced nodule is
relative to the liver but still shows persistent enhancement
and eventually becomes marked wash-out after 2min, the
degree of wash-out is still characterized as mild [32, 33].
In HCCs and liver metastases with hypervascularity and a
normal liver background on CEUS imaging, various CEUS
perfusion parameters on time intensity curve (TIC) may
objectively reect the difference of enhancement patterns
between HCCs and liver metastases.
4.3.2.3 CT Findings
Liver metastases present variable enhancement characteristics on contrast enhanced CT. They are best imaged in the
portal venous phase and typically appear as a hypoattenuating lesion. Some hypervascular metastases may show marked
arterial phase hyperenhancement. However, the benet of
arterial phase observation is controversial for evaluation of
such lesions [34].
4.3.2.4 MRI Findings
On non-enhanced MRI, metastases are typically hypointense
on T1-weighted images and show various degrees of hyperin-
tensity on T2-weighted images. They show restricted diffusion
on DWI and a signicant overlap exists for ADC values
between metastases and other malignant and benign lesions.
Postcontrast MRI imaging features are similar to those of
CT. With the use of hepatobiliary-specic contrast agent,
metastases show hypointense in hepatobiliary phase, which
provides excellent contrast between the liver parenchyma and
metastatic lesions and offers superior characterization and
greater specicity for diagnosis of liver metastases [34].
4.3.3 Dierential Diagnosis
4.3.3.1 Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Most HCCs may occur in cirrhotic liver. Certain atypical
HCC, especially poor differentiated HCC tends to show earlier
wash-out. However, HCCs frequently show diffuse arterial
phase hyperenhancement without a peripheral rim-like, and
their degree of wash-out tends to be mild showing substantial
enhancement within 2min after microbubble injection.
4.3.3.2 Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma
ICC usually presents arterial rim-like hyperenhancement
and rapid and complete wash-out, posing a challenge for

4 Malignant Liver Tumors
81
differential diagnosis. On conventional ultrasound, it frequently shows undened margin with dilated bile ducts in
the peripheral region. On CEUS, it may show patchy
hypoechoic areas in the peak enhancement and its size may
be signicantly increased compared with that of baseline
appearance.
4.3.3.3 Focal Fatty Liver Change
Focal fatty sparing can mimic a mass and pose a diagnostic
dilemma on conventional US and should be differentiated
with metastatic lesions in a steatosis liver background. On
CEUS, the lesion typically shows synchronization enhancement and wash-out, which can be considered diagnostic.
a
4.4 Dysplasia Nodules
Pei-LiFan, Wen-PingWang, and Bei-JianHuang
4.4.1 Terminology
4.4.1.1 Denitions
Most hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) occur in patients
with cirrhosis caused by various long-term liver damages
including chronic hepatitis B or C virus infections, alcoholic
liver disease, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, or autoimmune
hepatitis. Long-term chronic inammations lead to genetic
b
c
Fig. 4.34 A case of large intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) with
satellitosis. B mode ultrasound revealed a heterogeneously hypoechoic
mass with an ill-dened border (a). Color ow imaging showed a little
blood signal inside the lesion (b). The lesion showed heterogeneous
hypoenhancement in the arterial phase (c) and hypoenhancement in the
portal venous phase (d). The lesion manifested marked wash-out in the
late phase (e). In the portal venous phase, other small lesions under the
d
capsule showing hypoenhancement were detected around the major
lesion (arrow) (f). After another injection of contrast agent, the small
lesions showed peripheral rim-like hyperenhancement with nonenhancement in the center (arrow) (g), and hypoenhancement in the
portal venous phase (arrow) (h, i). The adjacent dilated bile ducts with
non-enhancement were detected (arrowheads)

82
hi
Y. Dong et al.
e
f
g
Fig. 4.34 (continued)

cd
4 Malignant Liver Tumors
83
a
b
Fig. 4.35 Liver metastases with different kinds of echogenicity on B
mode ultrasound. Hypoechoic liver metastasis from rectum adenocarcinoma (a). Hypoechoic liver metastasis from lung cancer (b).
variations leading to hepatocarcinogenesis. Recent data
revealed a sequence of changes in hepatic nodules before the
Hyperechoic liver metastasis from cecum adenocarcinoma (c).
Heterogeneously isoechoic liver metastasis from colorectal carcinoma
(d)
nodular lesions, was dened as a criterion for differential
diagnosis of well-differentiated HCC from HGDN [35].
occurrence of HCC.Some lesions are considered as precursors of HCCs. In 1995, the International Working Party
(IWP) of the World Congresses of Gastroenterology pro-
4.4.2 Imaging
posed a consensus nomenclature and diagnostic criteria for
hepatocellular nodular lesions in cirrhosis, which have been
widely adopted. The IWP classied hepatocellular nodular
lesions into large regenerative nodule (RN), low-grade dysplastic nodule (LGDN), high-grade dysplastic nodule
(HGDN), and HCC.In the latest World Health Organization
(WHO) classication of tumors of liver, premalignant lesions
of HCCs are classied into large cell change (formerly “dysplasia”), small cell change (formerly “dysplasia”), LGDN,
and HGDN.In 2007, the International Consensus Group for
Hepatocellular Neoplasia (ICGHN) updated the international consensus on the histopathologic diagnosis of hepatocellular nodular lesions. Stromal invasion, tumor cell
invasion into the portal tracts or brous septa within vaguely
The critical alterations during hepatocarcinogenesis detected
by imaging methods are simultaneous and gradual decrease
of portal tracts, hepatocyte function, Kupffer cell density,
and organic anionic transporting polypeptide (OATP) expres-
sion, meanwhile development of sinusoidal capillarization
and unpaired arterioles. Furthermore, venous drainage
changes from hepatic veins to portal veins. In early hepato-
carcinogenesis, fat content in the lesions sometimes
increases, then in progressed HCC, fat content usually
regresses [36].
Nourishing vessel changes in hepatocarcinogenesis in
liver cirrhosis are summarized in Fig. 4.44. Three stages
according to the pathological and imaging features could be

84
Y. Dong et al.
a
c
b
d
Fig. 4.36 Target sign or “bull’s eye” sign on B mode ultrasound. Liver metastases from malignant melanoma (a), liver metastases from malignant
melanoma (b), liver metastases from colon carcinoma (c), and liver metastases from gastric stromal tumor (d)
divided during hepatocarcinogenesis in liver cirrhosis: premalignant stage (including DNs, especially HGDNs), early
HCC stage (including well-differentiated HCCs of the vague
margin and HCCs with diameter ≤2 cm), and progressed
HCC stage (including moderately- or poorly-differentiated
HCCs) [37].
4.4.2.2 Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Findings
Based on angiogenesis and hemodynamic changes during
hepatocarcinogenesis, several imaging methods could be
used to diagnose cirrhosis-associated nodules. After CT and
MRI, contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has been used as
a second-line imaging method to detect and recognize various liver lesions.
4.4.2.1 Conventional Ultrasound Findings
Ultrasound (US) is a screening method for HCC surveillance
because of its convenience, availability, safety, and costeffectiveness. However, it is challenging to identify DNs in
the background of cirrhotic liver because of their vague margin and small size. On B-mode US, DNs could be hypo-,
iso-, or hyperechoic, which is overlapped with RNs or small
HCCs. When fat content occurs in the lesions, DNs usually
manifest hyperechoic.
Blood supply of DNs maybe both from portal vessels and
from newly formed unpaired arteries. Portal tracts usually
still remain in DNs, but maybe few and scarred. Unpaired
arteries increase in both number and size through HGDN and
well-differentiated HCC developmental stages. Therefore,
DNs typically show isoenhancement (Fig.4.45) or hypoenhancement in arterial phase and isoenhancement on subsequent phases on CEUS, as compared to the surrounding liver.
In transient phases before the development of unpaired arter-

ef
4 Malignant Liver Tumors
85
a
c
b
d
Fig. 4.37 A case of liver metastasis from breast cancer. A slightly
hyperechoic lesion was found near the diaphragm in right hepatic lobe
on B mode ultrasound (a). It was enhanced rapidly and homogeneously
in arterial phase of CEUS (b–e). At 33s after injection of SonoVue, the
lesion showed rapid wash-out (f). It was observed hypoenhancement in
both portal venous and late phases (g). Time intensity curve (TIC)
reected the lesion rapid “wash-in and wash-out” process (h)

86
Y. Dong et al.
g
Fig. 4.37 (continued)
a
h
b
c
Fig. 4.38 A case of liver metastases from colon carcinoma. The lesion
showed isoechoic clearly on B mode ultrasound (a). Few color ow
signals can be detected (b). Arterial Doppler spectrum with low resistance index (RI) as 0.79 was measured (c). The lesion showed branch-
d
like hyperenhancement in the peripheral region of the lesion and ll-in
rapidly in arterial phase (d–f). At 33s after injection of SonoVue, the
lesions showed wash-out obviously (g), and became hypoenhancement
in portal venous (h) and late phases (i)
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
