Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System: Review of Pros and Cons

Author(s):  
Eleonora Terzi ◽  
Carmen Ayuso ◽  
Fabio Piscaglia ◽  
Jordi Bruix

AbstractThe American College of Radiology has released the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) scheme which categorizes focal liver lesions (FLLs) in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) according to the degree of risk of nodules to be HCC. It subgroups FLL in LR-1 (definitely benign), LR-2 (probably benign), LR-3 (intermediate probability of malignancy), LR-4 (probably HCC), LR-5 (definitely HCC), and LR-M (probable malignancy not specific for HCC). Computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI) and contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) LI-RADS diagnostic algorithm have the goal to standardize the acquisition, interpretation, reporting, and data collection for imaging examinations in patients at risk for HCC. Nevertheless, there remain controversial issues that should be dealt with. The aim of this review is to discuss the pros and cons of the interpretation and reporting part of CT/MRI and CEUS LI-RADS diagnostic algorithm to permit future refinements of the scheme and optimize patient and nodule management.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
HuiFang Li ◽  
Wei Huang ◽  
Wei Zheng ◽  
Qing Li ◽  
YunZhu Dai ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Contrast-enhanced Ultrasonography Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (CEUS LI-RADS) released by American College of Radiology was a widely used reporting system for patients at risk with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In CEUS LI-RADS, the categories range from definitely benign (LR-1), probably begin (LR-2), intermediate probability of malignancy (LR-3), probably HCC (LR-4) to definitely HCC (LR-5), malignancy (LR-M), or definite tumor in vein (LR-TIV). Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane, Embase, and Chinese databases to obtain eligible studies reporting on the diagnostic performance of CEUS LI-RADS in patients at risk for HCC. Results: Twelve studies were eligible in the analysis, including 5275 patients, 5739 observations, and 4066 HCCs. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 70% (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 65%-74%), 94% (95% CI, 91%-96%) of LR-5 category as predictors of HCC, respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of LR-M category as a predictor of non-HCC malignancy were 83% (95% CI, 71%-91%), 94% (95% CI 88%-97%), respectively. The pooled proportions of HCCs were 1% (95% CI 0%-6%) for LR-2, 20% (95% CI, 9%-34%) for LR-3, 78% (95% CI, 67%-88%) for LR-4, 97% (95% CI, 94%-99%) for LR-5, 40% (95% CI, 23%–58%) for LR-M and 100% (95% CI, 93%–100%) for LR-TIV.Conclusion: CEUS LI-RADS is an important tool for the diagnosis of HCC.


Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 323
Author(s):  
Lingling Li ◽  
Yixin Hu ◽  
Jing Han ◽  
Qing Li ◽  
Chuan Peng ◽  
...  

The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is a comprehensive system for standardizing liver imaging in patients at risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to determine the diagnostic performance of LI-RADS category 5 (LR5) for diagnosing HCC and LI-RADS category M (LRM) for characterizing other non-HCC malignancies (OM) using contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Multiple databases were searched for articles evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of CEUS LI-RADS and/or CT/MRI LI-RADS. A random-effects model was adopted to synthesize the summary estimates of the diagnostic accuracy of LR5 for diagnosing HCC and LRM for characterizing OM using CEUS and CT/MRI. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of CEUS LR5 for the diagnosis of HCC were 69% and 93%, respectively. The pooled sensitivity was 67% and the specificity, 93% of CT/MRI LR5 for HCC diagnosis. There was no significant difference between the overall diagnostic accuracy for HCC diagnosis of CEUS LR5 and that of CT/MRI LR5 in terms of diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) (p = 0.55). The sensitivity was 84% with a specificity of 90% in the CEUS LRM for characterizing OM, while the sensitivity and specificity of CT/MRI LRM for characterizing OM was 63% and 95%. The DOR of CEUS LRM for characterizing OM was higher than that of CT/MRI LRM without significant difference (50.59 vs. 36.06, p = 0.34). This meta-analysis indicated that CEUS LI-RADS is qualified to characterize HCC and OM and may provide complementary information on liver nodules to CT/MRI LI-RADS.


2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (11) ◽  
pp. 3789-3799 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min Jeong Cho ◽  
Chansik An ◽  
Khalid Suliman Aljoqiman ◽  
Jin-Young Choi ◽  
Joon Seok Lim ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Hang Zhou ◽  
Chao Zhang ◽  
Linyao Du ◽  
Jiapeng Jiang ◽  
Qing Zhao ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives To determine the diagnostic performance and inter-reader agreement of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound liver imaging reporting and data system (CEUS-LI-RADS) for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in high-risk patients. Methods In this prospective study, CEUS-LI-RADS categories (LR-5 for predicting HCC) were assigned by six blinded readers and compared to the definitive HCC diagnosis in patients with liver cirrhosis per the 2017 China Liver Cancer Guidelines (CLCG). CEUS features were recorded in 96 patients with 96 histology-proven lesions. The diagnostic performance of LR-5 was described by the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. Multi-reader agreement was assessed by using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Results In cirrhotic patients, the specificity of LR-5 (range: 92.7–100.0 %) was statistically higher than that of CLCG for each reader (range: 28.6–64.3 %). However, the sensitivity (range: 38.6–63.6 %) and accuracy (range: 53.4–70.7 %) were statistically lower in CEUS-LIRADS than in CLCG (sensitivity range: 88.6–100.0 %; accuracy range: 77.6–86.2 %). Only fair to moderate inter-reader agreement was achieved for the CEUS-LI-RADS category (ICC = 0.595) and washout appearance (ICC range: 0.338 to 0.555). Neither nodule-in-nodule nor mosaic architecture was observed more often in HCC (all P > 0.05), with poor inter-reader consistency for both (both ICC < 0.20). Conclusion CEUS-LI-RADS category 5 has a high specificity but a low accuracy for identifying HCC in high-risk patients. Inter-reader agreement is not satisfactory concerning CEUS-LIRADS category and washout appearance. Moreover, the clinical value of ancillary features favoring HCC is quite limited.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document