Improved diagnosis of histological capsule in hepatocallular carcinoma by using nonenhancing capsule appearance in addition to enhancing capsule appearance in gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI

1. Forner, A., Llovet, J. M. & Bruix, J. Hepatocellular carcinoma. Lancet 379, 1245–1255 (2012).

2. El-Serag, H. B. & Kanwal, F. Epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States: Where are we? Where do we go?

Hepatology 60, 1767–1775 (2014).

3. Lee, Y. J. et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma: Diagnostic performance of multidetector CT and MR Imaging-A systematic review and

meta-analysis. Radiology 275, 97–109 (2015).

4. Bruix, J. & Sherman, M. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: An update. Hepatology 53, 1020–1022 (2011).

5. European Association For The Study Of The Liver; European Organisation For Research And Treatment Of Cancer. EASL-EORTC

clinical practice guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Hepatol. 56, 908–943 (2012).

6. Wald, C. et al. New OPTN/UNOS policy for liver transplant allocation: Standardization of liver imaging, diagnosis, classification,

and reporting of hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiology 266, 376–382 (2013).

7. Sellerer, T. et al. Dual-energy CT: A phantom comparison of different platforms for abdominal imaging. Eur. Radiol. 28, 2745–2755

(2018).

8. Tang, A. et al. Evidence supporting LI-RADS major features for CT- and MR imaging-based diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma:

A systematic review. Radiology 286, 29–48 (2018).

9. Fowler, K. J. et al. Interreader reliability of LI-RADS version 2014 algorithm and imaging features for diagnosis of hepatocellular

carcinoma: A Large international multireader study. Radiology 286, 173–185 (2018).

10. Motosugi, U. et al. Distinguishing hypervascular pseudolesions of the liver from hypervascular hepatocellular carcinomas with

gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 256, 151–158 (2010).

11. Bashir, M. R. et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in a North American population: Does hepatobiliary MR imaging with Gd-EOBDTPA improve sensitivity and confidence for diagnosis? J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 37, 398–406 (2013).

12. Yu, M. H. et al. Small (</=1-cm) hepatocellular carcinoma: Diagnostic performance and imaging features at gadoxetic acidenhanced MR imaging. Radiology 271, 748–760 (2014).

13. Sofue, K. et al. Does Gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0T MRI in addition to 64-detector-row contrast-enhanced CT provide better

diagnostic performance and change the therapeutic strategy for the preoperative evaluation of colorectal liver metastases? Eur.

Radiol. 24, 2532–2539 (2014).

14. Tsurusaki, M. et al. Comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced computed

tomography with histopathological examinations for the identification of hepatocellular carcinoma: A multicenter phase III study.

J. Gastroenterol. 51, 71–79 (2016).

15. Davenport, M. S. et al. Comparison of acute transient dyspnea after intravenous administration of gadoxetate disodium and

gadobenate dimeglumine: Effect on arterial phase image quality. Radiology 266, 452–461 (2013).

16. Sofue, K., Marin, D., Jaffe, T. A., Nelson, R. C. & Bashir, M. R. Can combining triple-arterial phase acquisition with fluoroscopic

triggering provide both optimal early and late hepatic arterial phase images during gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI? J. Magn. Reson.

Imaging 43, 1073–1081 (2016).

17. Choi, S. H. et al. Diagnostic criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma 3 cm with hepatocyte-specific contrast-enhanced magnetic

resonance imaging. J. Hepatol. 64, 1099–1107 (2016).

18. Ishigami, K. et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma with a pseudocapsule on gadolinium-enhanced MR images: Correlation with histopathologic findings. Radiology 250, 435–443 (2009).

19. Khan, A. S. et al. Value of delayed hypointensity and delayed enhancing rim in magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis of small

hepatocellular carcinoma in the cirrhotic liver. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 32, 360–366 (2010).

20. Bashir, M. R. et al. Concordance of hypervascular liver nodule characterization between the organ procurement and transplant

network and liver imaging reporting and data system classifications. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 42, 305–314 (2015).

21. Dioguardi-Burgio, M. et al. MR-imaging features of hepatocellular carcinoma capsule appearance in cirrhotic liver: Comparison

of gadoxetic acid and gadobenate dimeglumine. Abd. Radiol. 41, 1546–1554 (2016).

22. Joo, I. et al. Liver imaging reporting and data system v2014 categorization of hepatocellular carcinoma on gadoxetic acid-enhanced

MRI: Comparison with multiphasic multidetector computed tomography. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 45, 731–740 (2017).

23. Allen, B. C. et al. Comparison of visualization rates of LI-RADS version 2014 major features with IV gadobenate dimeglumine or

gadoxetate disodium in patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 210, 1266–1272 (2018).

24. An, C. et al. Added value of smooth hypointense rim in the hepatobiliary phase of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI in identifying

tumour capsule and diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur. Radiol. 27, 2610–2618 (2017).

25. Lee, S. et al. Application of liver imaging reporting and data system version 2018 ancillary features to upgrade from LR-4 to LR-5

on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. Eur. Radiol. 31, 855–863 (2021).

26. Bosman, F. T., World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer. WHO classification of tumours of the

digestive system. World Health Organization classification of tumours, 4th edition; third (IARC Press, 2010).

27. Bedossa, P. & Poynard, T. An algorithm for the grading of activity in chronic hepatitis C: The METAVIR Cooperative Study Group.

Hepatology 24, 289–293 (1996).

28. Rimola, J. et al. Non-invasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma </ = 2 cm in cirrhosis: Diagnostic accuracy assessing fat,

capsule and signal intensity at dynamic MRI. J Hepatol 56, 1317–1323 (2012).

29. Sofue, K. et al. How reader perception of capsule affects interpretation of washout in hypervascular liver nodules in patients at

risk for hepatocellular carcinoma. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 43, 1337–1345 (2016).

30. Davenport, M. S. et al. Repeatability of diagnostic features and scoring systems for hepatocellular carcinoma by using MR imaging.

Radiology 272, 132–142 (2014).

31. Iguchi, T. et al. Both fibrous capsule formation and extracapsular penetration are powerful predictors of poor survival in human

hepatocellular carcinoma: A histological assessment of 365 patients in Japan. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 16, 2539–2546 (2009).

Scientific Reports |

Vol:.(1234567890)

(2023) 13:6113 |

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-33048-8

10

www.nature.com/scientificreports/

32. Xu, L. et al. Prognostic nomogram for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma after transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. J. Hepatol. 63, 122–130 (2015).

33. An, C. et al. Single hepatocellular carcinoma: Preoperative MR imaging to predict early recurrence after curative resection. Radiology 276, 433–443 (2015).

34. Chernyak, V. et al. Liver imaging reporting and data system: Discordance between computed tomography and gadoxetate-enhanced

magnetic resonance imaging for detection of hepatocellular carcinoma major features. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr. 42, 155–161

(2017).

35. Zhang, Y. D. et al. Liver imaging reporting and data system: Substantial discordance between CT and MR for imaging classification

of hepatic nodules. Acad Radiol. 23, 344–352 (2016).

Author contributions

K.S. initiated the study; made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work, and analysis of

the data. K.S., K.M., E.U., S.K., Y.U., and M.T. made substantial contributions to the acquisition of the data. E.N.

wrote the draft of the manuscript. K.S., E.U., M.T., T.F., and T.M. critically revised the manuscript for important

intellectual content. All authors have agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to K.S.

Reprints and permissions information is available at www.nature.com/reprints.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and

institutional affiliations.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International

License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or

format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the

Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this

article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the

material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not

permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from

the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creat​iveco​mmons.​org/​licen​ses/​by/4.​0/.

© The Author(s) 2023

Scientific Reports |

(2023) 13:6113 |

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-33048-8

11

Vol.:(0123456789)

...