Cargando…
Extracellular volume fraction using contrast-enhanced CT is useful in differentiating intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether tumor extracellular volume fraction (fECV) on contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) aids in the differentiation between intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: In this retrospective study, 113 patients with pathologicall...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10359704/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37483497 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1214977 |
_version_ | 1785075944965275648 |
---|---|
author | Honda, T. Onishi, H. Fukui, H. Yano, K. Kiso, K. Nakamoto, A. Tsuboyama, T. Ota, T. Tatsumi, M. Tahara, S. Kobayashi, S. Eguchi, H. Tomiyama, N. |
author_facet | Honda, T. Onishi, H. Fukui, H. Yano, K. Kiso, K. Nakamoto, A. Tsuboyama, T. Ota, T. Tatsumi, M. Tahara, S. Kobayashi, S. Eguchi, H. Tomiyama, N. |
author_sort | Honda, T. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether tumor extracellular volume fraction (fECV) on contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) aids in the differentiation between intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: In this retrospective study, 113 patients with pathologically confirmed ICC (n = 39) or HCC (n = 74) who had undergone preoperative contrast-enhanced CT were enrolled. Enhancement values of the tumor (E(tumor)) and aorta (E(aorta)) were obtained in the precontrast and equilibrium phase CT images. fECV was calculated using the following equation: fECV [%] = E(tumor)/E(aorta) × (100 – hematocrit [%]). fECV values were compared between the ICC and HCC groups using Welch’s t-test. The diagnostic performance of fECV for differentiating ICC and HCC was assessed using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. fECV and the CT imaging features of tumors were evaluated by two radiologists. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors predicting a diagnosis of ICC. RESULTS: Mean fECV was significantly higher in ICCs (43.8% ± 13.2%) than that in HCCs (31.6% ± 9.0%, p < 0.001). The area under the curve for differentiating ICC from HCC was 0.763 when the cutoff value of fECV was 41.5%. The multivariate analysis identified fECV (unit OR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.01–1.21; p < 0.05), peripheral rim enhancement during the arterial phase (OR: 17.0; 95% CI: 1.29–225; p < 0.05), and absence of washout pattern (OR: 235; 95% CI: 14.03–3933; p < 0.001) as independent CT features for differentiating between the two tumor types. CONCLUSIONS: A high value of fECV, peripheral rim enhancement during the arterial phase, and absence of washout pattern were independent factors in the differentiation of ICC from HCC. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10359704 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103597042023-07-22 Extracellular volume fraction using contrast-enhanced CT is useful in differentiating intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma Honda, T. Onishi, H. Fukui, H. Yano, K. Kiso, K. Nakamoto, A. Tsuboyama, T. Ota, T. Tatsumi, M. Tahara, S. Kobayashi, S. Eguchi, H. Tomiyama, N. Front Oncol Oncology OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether tumor extracellular volume fraction (fECV) on contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) aids in the differentiation between intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: In this retrospective study, 113 patients with pathologically confirmed ICC (n = 39) or HCC (n = 74) who had undergone preoperative contrast-enhanced CT were enrolled. Enhancement values of the tumor (E(tumor)) and aorta (E(aorta)) were obtained in the precontrast and equilibrium phase CT images. fECV was calculated using the following equation: fECV [%] = E(tumor)/E(aorta) × (100 – hematocrit [%]). fECV values were compared between the ICC and HCC groups using Welch’s t-test. The diagnostic performance of fECV for differentiating ICC and HCC was assessed using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. fECV and the CT imaging features of tumors were evaluated by two radiologists. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors predicting a diagnosis of ICC. RESULTS: Mean fECV was significantly higher in ICCs (43.8% ± 13.2%) than that in HCCs (31.6% ± 9.0%, p < 0.001). The area under the curve for differentiating ICC from HCC was 0.763 when the cutoff value of fECV was 41.5%. The multivariate analysis identified fECV (unit OR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.01–1.21; p < 0.05), peripheral rim enhancement during the arterial phase (OR: 17.0; 95% CI: 1.29–225; p < 0.05), and absence of washout pattern (OR: 235; 95% CI: 14.03–3933; p < 0.001) as independent CT features for differentiating between the two tumor types. CONCLUSIONS: A high value of fECV, peripheral rim enhancement during the arterial phase, and absence of washout pattern were independent factors in the differentiation of ICC from HCC. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC10359704/ /pubmed/37483497 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1214977 Text en Copyright © 2023 Honda, Onishi, Fukui, Yano, Kiso, Nakamoto, Tsuboyama, Ota, Tatsumi, Tahara, Kobayashi, Eguchi and Tomiyama https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Oncology Honda, T. Onishi, H. Fukui, H. Yano, K. Kiso, K. Nakamoto, A. Tsuboyama, T. Ota, T. Tatsumi, M. Tahara, S. Kobayashi, S. Eguchi, H. Tomiyama, N. Extracellular volume fraction using contrast-enhanced CT is useful in differentiating intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma |
title | Extracellular volume fraction using contrast-enhanced CT is useful in differentiating intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma |
title_full | Extracellular volume fraction using contrast-enhanced CT is useful in differentiating intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma |
title_fullStr | Extracellular volume fraction using contrast-enhanced CT is useful in differentiating intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma |
title_full_unstemmed | Extracellular volume fraction using contrast-enhanced CT is useful in differentiating intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma |
title_short | Extracellular volume fraction using contrast-enhanced CT is useful in differentiating intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma |
title_sort | extracellular volume fraction using contrast-enhanced ct is useful in differentiating intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma from hepatocellular carcinoma |
topic | Oncology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10359704/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37483497 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1214977 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hondat extracellularvolumefractionusingcontrastenhancedctisusefulindifferentiatingintrahepaticcholangiocellularcarcinomafromhepatocellularcarcinoma AT onishih extracellularvolumefractionusingcontrastenhancedctisusefulindifferentiatingintrahepaticcholangiocellularcarcinomafromhepatocellularcarcinoma AT fukuih extracellularvolumefractionusingcontrastenhancedctisusefulindifferentiatingintrahepaticcholangiocellularcarcinomafromhepatocellularcarcinoma AT yanok extracellularvolumefractionusingcontrastenhancedctisusefulindifferentiatingintrahepaticcholangiocellularcarcinomafromhepatocellularcarcinoma AT kisok extracellularvolumefractionusingcontrastenhancedctisusefulindifferentiatingintrahepaticcholangiocellularcarcinomafromhepatocellularcarcinoma AT nakamotoa extracellularvolumefractionusingcontrastenhancedctisusefulindifferentiatingintrahepaticcholangiocellularcarcinomafromhepatocellularcarcinoma AT tsuboyamat extracellularvolumefractionusingcontrastenhancedctisusefulindifferentiatingintrahepaticcholangiocellularcarcinomafromhepatocellularcarcinoma AT otat extracellularvolumefractionusingcontrastenhancedctisusefulindifferentiatingintrahepaticcholangiocellularcarcinomafromhepatocellularcarcinoma AT tatsumim extracellularvolumefractionusingcontrastenhancedctisusefulindifferentiatingintrahepaticcholangiocellularcarcinomafromhepatocellularcarcinoma AT taharas extracellularvolumefractionusingcontrastenhancedctisusefulindifferentiatingintrahepaticcholangiocellularcarcinomafromhepatocellularcarcinoma AT kobayashis extracellularvolumefractionusingcontrastenhancedctisusefulindifferentiatingintrahepaticcholangiocellularcarcinomafromhepatocellularcarcinoma AT eguchih extracellularvolumefractionusingcontrastenhancedctisusefulindifferentiatingintrahepaticcholangiocellularcarcinomafromhepatocellularcarcinoma AT tomiyaman extracellularvolumefractionusingcontrastenhancedctisusefulindifferentiatingintrahepaticcholangiocellularcarcinomafromhepatocellularcarcinoma |