MRI versus 64-row MDCT for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma

Table 1 Demographics, aetiology of liver cirrhosis and clinical condition of the patients (n = 28)

	n
Gender
Male	25
Female	3
Mean age (yr)	67.0 ± 10.8 (range 46-89)
Aetiology of liver cirrhosis
Ethanol	13
Hepatitis B	2
Hepatitis C	7
Cryptogenetic	6
Clinical stage
BCLC stage
A	6
B	22
C	0
D	0
Child Pugh
A	24
B	4
C	0
Okuda
I	25
II	3
III	0
ECOG
0	26
I	2
II	0
III	0
IV	0
Histological tumour grading
Well	16
Moderate	4
Poor	2
Unknown	3
No biopsy	3

BCLC: Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer; ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group.

Table 2 Diagnostic impact of imaging protocols on tumour detection n (%)

Imaging protocols of MDCT and MRI	Tumour nodules detected
MRI, T1w 3D-Flash, arterial phase (20 s start delay)	158 (97.5)
MRI, T1w 3D-Flash, portal-venous phase (45 s start delay)	145 (89.5)
MRI, T1w 3D-Flash, equilibrium phase (90 s start delay)	127 (78.4)
MDCT, arterial phase (bolus trigger for start delay)	119 (73.5)
MRI, T1w 3D-Flash, delayed phase (300 s start delay)	115 (71.0)
MRI, T1w 3D-Flash, dynamic phase Phase (T1 native)	109 (67.3)
MRI, T1w 2D Flash native	104 (64.2)
MRI, Dual-GRE in-phase	98 (60.5)
MRI, Dual-GRE out-phase	96 (59.3)
MDCT, portal-venous phase (55 s start delay)	84 (51.9)
MRI, T2w TSE	72 (44.4)
MDCT, native phase	56 (34.6)

MDCT: Multidetector computed tomography; MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging.

Table 3 Results of consensus reading of MDCT and MRI: No. of detected tumour nodules by MDCT and MRI depending on tumour size scaling

		MRI
		Negative	≤ 5 mm	≤ 10 mm	≤ 15 mm	≤ 20 mm	> 20 mm	Total
	Negative		5	17	12	4	1	39
	≤ 5 mm		2	21	21			6
	≤ 10 mm	2		13	111	41		30
MDCT	≤ 15 mm	1		12	12	111	41	29
	≤ 20 mm					3	91	12
	> 20 mm						46	46
	Total	3	7	33	37	22	60	162

¹Nodules which appeared greater in MRI compared to CT;

²Only the single nodule was bigger in CT compared to MRI.