Search

Patients with early stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) can be cured by liver transplantation. HCC imaging features on CT or MRI are specific enough to allow for definitive diagnosis and treatment without the need of confirmatory biopsy. When applied to the appropriate at-risk population the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) imaging criteria achieve high specificity and positive predictive value for the diagnosis of HCC. The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) is the United States organization that aims to assure the adequate and fair distribution of livers across candidates. Given the importance of fair organ allocation, OPTN also provides stringent imaging criteria for the diagnosis of HCC aiming to avoid false positive diagnosis. Although most imaging criteria are identical for both systems, discrepancies between LI-RADS and the current OPTN classification system for HCC diagnosis exists. Main differences include, but are not limited to, the binary approach of OPTN to classify lesions as HCC or not, versus the probabilistic algorithmic approach of LI-RADS, technical and interpretation considerations, and the approach towards treated lesions. The purpose of this article is to highlight the similarities and discrepancies between LI-RADS and the current OPTN criteria for HCC diagnosis and the implications that these differences may have on the management of patients who are transplant candidates.

Objective: To investigate if size measurements of liver observations is more variable in the arterial phase as suggested by LI-RADS and assess potential higher instability in categorization in this particular phase. Secondarily, to assess inter- and intra-reader agreement for size across phases., Materials and Methods: Patients with liver cirrhosis who underwent multi-arterial phase MRI between 2017 and 2018 were retrospectively selected. Three radiologists measured liver observations in each phase, independently, in a random order. Mean size between early and late arterial phases (AP), 2, 3 and 10 min delay and the number of observations crossing the LI-RADS size thresholds (10 and 20 mm) per phase were compared using McNemar's test. Reader agreement was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and bootstrap-based comparisons. Bonferroni's correction was applied to pairwise comparisons., Results: 94 observations (LR-3, LR-4, LR-5, and LR-M) were included. Mean sizes (mm) were late AP: 19.9 (95% CI 17.2, 24.2), 2 min delay: 19.8 (95% CI 17.1, 24.0), 3 min delay: 19.8 (95% CI 17.2, 24.0), 10 min delay: 20.2 (95% CI 17.5, 24.5) (p = 0.10-0.88). There was no difference between phases in number of observations that could have changed category due to variability in size (p = 0.546-1.000). Inter- and intra-reader agreement was excellent (ICC = 0.952-0.981)., Conclusion: Measurements of focal liver observations were consistent across all post-contrast imaging phases and we found no higher instability in LI-RADS category in any particular phase. Inter- and intra-reader agreement for size was excellent for each phase. Based on these findings, size measurement could be allowed on any post-contrast phase, including the arterial phase, if deemed appropriate by the radiologist.