Imaging Techniques for the Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Roger Chou, Carlos Cuevas, Rongwei (Rochelle) Fu, Beth Devine, Ngoc Wasson, Alexander Ginsburg, Bernadette Zakher, Miranda Pappas, Elaine Graham, Sean D. Sullivan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

63 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

DATA SYNTHESIS: Few studies have evaluated imaging for HCC in surveillance settings. In nonsurveillance settings, sensitivity for detection of HCC lesions was lower for ultrasonography without contrast than for CT or MRI (pooled difference based on direct comparisons, 0.11 to 0.22), and MRI was associated with higher sensitivity than CT (pooled difference, 0.09 [95% CI, 0.07 to 12]). For evaluation of focal liver lesions, there were no clear differences in sensitivity among ultrasonography with contrast, CT, and MRI. Specificity was generally 0.85 or higher across imaging modalities, but this item was not reported in many studies. Factors associated with lower sensitivity included use of an explanted liver reference standard, and smaller or more well-differentiated HCC lesions. For MRI, sensitivity was slightly higher for hepatic-specific than nonspecific contrast agents.

LIMITATIONS: Only English-language articles were included, there was statistical heterogeneity in pooled analyses, and costs were not assessed. Most studies were conducted in Asia and had methodological limitations.

CONCLUSION: CT and MRI are associated with higher sensitivity than ultrasonography without contrast for detection of HCC; sensitivity was higher for MRI than CT. For evaluation of focal liver lesions, the sensitivities of ultrasonography with contrast, CT, and MRI for HCC are similar.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (

PROSPERO: CRD42014007016).

BACKGROUND: Several imaging modalities are available for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the test performance of imaging modalities for HCC.

DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (1998 to December 2014), the Cochrane Library Database, Scopus, and reference lists.

STUDY SELECTION: Studies on test performance of ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

DATA EXTRACTION: One investigator abstracted data, and a second investigator confirmed them; 2 investigators independently assessed study quality and strength of evidence.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)697-711
Number of pages15
JournalAnnals of Internal Medicine
Volume162
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - May 19 2015

Fingerprint

Meta-Analysis
Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Tomography
Ultrasonography
Liver
Research Personnel
Information Storage and Retrieval
Health Services Research
MEDLINE
Contrast Media
Libraries
Language
Databases
Costs and Cost Analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Imaging Techniques for the Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. / Chou, Roger; Cuevas, Carlos; Fu, Rongwei (Rochelle); Devine, Beth; Wasson, Ngoc; Ginsburg, Alexander; Zakher, Bernadette; Pappas, Miranda; Graham, Elaine; Sullivan, Sean D.

In: Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 162, No. 10, 19.05.2015, p. 697-711.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Chou, R, Cuevas, C, Fu, RR, Devine, B, Wasson, N, Ginsburg, A, Zakher, B, Pappas, M, Graham, E & Sullivan, SD 2015, 'Imaging Techniques for the Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis', Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 162, no. 10, pp. 697-711. https://doi.org/10.7326/M14-2509
Chou, Roger ; Cuevas, Carlos ; Fu, Rongwei (Rochelle) ; Devine, Beth ; Wasson, Ngoc ; Ginsburg, Alexander ; Zakher, Bernadette ; Pappas, Miranda ; Graham, Elaine ; Sullivan, Sean D. / Imaging Techniques for the Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. In: Annals of Internal Medicine. 2015 ; Vol. 162, No. 10. pp. 697-711.
@article{6396b55d8cc941fa9cf85d2131059909,
title = "Imaging Techniques for the Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis",
abstract = "DATA SYNTHESIS: Few studies have evaluated imaging for HCC in surveillance settings. In nonsurveillance settings, sensitivity for detection of HCC lesions was lower for ultrasonography without contrast than for CT or MRI (pooled difference based on direct comparisons, 0.11 to 0.22), and MRI was associated with higher sensitivity than CT (pooled difference, 0.09 [95{\%} CI, 0.07 to 12]). For evaluation of focal liver lesions, there were no clear differences in sensitivity among ultrasonography with contrast, CT, and MRI. Specificity was generally 0.85 or higher across imaging modalities, but this item was not reported in many studies. Factors associated with lower sensitivity included use of an explanted liver reference standard, and smaller or more well-differentiated HCC lesions. For MRI, sensitivity was slightly higher for hepatic-specific than nonspecific contrast agents.LIMITATIONS: Only English-language articles were included, there was statistical heterogeneity in pooled analyses, and costs were not assessed. Most studies were conducted in Asia and had methodological limitations.CONCLUSION: CT and MRI are associated with higher sensitivity than ultrasonography without contrast for detection of HCC; sensitivity was higher for MRI than CT. For evaluation of focal liver lesions, the sensitivities of ultrasonography with contrast, CT, and MRI for HCC are similar.PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42014007016).BACKGROUND: Several imaging modalities are available for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).PURPOSE: To evaluate the test performance of imaging modalities for HCC.DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (1998 to December 2014), the Cochrane Library Database, Scopus, and reference lists.STUDY SELECTION: Studies on test performance of ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).DATA EXTRACTION: One investigator abstracted data, and a second investigator confirmed them; 2 investigators independently assessed study quality and strength of evidence.",
author = "Roger Chou and Carlos Cuevas and Fu, {Rongwei (Rochelle)} and Beth Devine and Ngoc Wasson and Alexander Ginsburg and Bernadette Zakher and Miranda Pappas and Elaine Graham and Sullivan, {Sean D.}",
year = "2015",
month = "5",
day = "19",
doi = "10.7326/M14-2509",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "162",
pages = "697--711",
journal = "Annals of Internal Medicine",
issn = "0003-4819",
publisher = "American College of Physicians",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Imaging Techniques for the Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

T2 - A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

AU - Chou, Roger

AU - Cuevas, Carlos

AU - Fu, Rongwei (Rochelle)

AU - Devine, Beth

AU - Wasson, Ngoc

AU - Ginsburg, Alexander

AU - Zakher, Bernadette

AU - Pappas, Miranda

AU - Graham, Elaine

AU - Sullivan, Sean D.

PY - 2015/5/19

Y1 - 2015/5/19

N2 - DATA SYNTHESIS: Few studies have evaluated imaging for HCC in surveillance settings. In nonsurveillance settings, sensitivity for detection of HCC lesions was lower for ultrasonography without contrast than for CT or MRI (pooled difference based on direct comparisons, 0.11 to 0.22), and MRI was associated with higher sensitivity than CT (pooled difference, 0.09 [95% CI, 0.07 to 12]). For evaluation of focal liver lesions, there were no clear differences in sensitivity among ultrasonography with contrast, CT, and MRI. Specificity was generally 0.85 or higher across imaging modalities, but this item was not reported in many studies. Factors associated with lower sensitivity included use of an explanted liver reference standard, and smaller or more well-differentiated HCC lesions. For MRI, sensitivity was slightly higher for hepatic-specific than nonspecific contrast agents.LIMITATIONS: Only English-language articles were included, there was statistical heterogeneity in pooled analyses, and costs were not assessed. Most studies were conducted in Asia and had methodological limitations.CONCLUSION: CT and MRI are associated with higher sensitivity than ultrasonography without contrast for detection of HCC; sensitivity was higher for MRI than CT. For evaluation of focal liver lesions, the sensitivities of ultrasonography with contrast, CT, and MRI for HCC are similar.PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42014007016).BACKGROUND: Several imaging modalities are available for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).PURPOSE: To evaluate the test performance of imaging modalities for HCC.DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (1998 to December 2014), the Cochrane Library Database, Scopus, and reference lists.STUDY SELECTION: Studies on test performance of ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).DATA EXTRACTION: One investigator abstracted data, and a second investigator confirmed them; 2 investigators independently assessed study quality and strength of evidence.

AB - DATA SYNTHESIS: Few studies have evaluated imaging for HCC in surveillance settings. In nonsurveillance settings, sensitivity for detection of HCC lesions was lower for ultrasonography without contrast than for CT or MRI (pooled difference based on direct comparisons, 0.11 to 0.22), and MRI was associated with higher sensitivity than CT (pooled difference, 0.09 [95% CI, 0.07 to 12]). For evaluation of focal liver lesions, there were no clear differences in sensitivity among ultrasonography with contrast, CT, and MRI. Specificity was generally 0.85 or higher across imaging modalities, but this item was not reported in many studies. Factors associated with lower sensitivity included use of an explanted liver reference standard, and smaller or more well-differentiated HCC lesions. For MRI, sensitivity was slightly higher for hepatic-specific than nonspecific contrast agents.LIMITATIONS: Only English-language articles were included, there was statistical heterogeneity in pooled analyses, and costs were not assessed. Most studies were conducted in Asia and had methodological limitations.CONCLUSION: CT and MRI are associated with higher sensitivity than ultrasonography without contrast for detection of HCC; sensitivity was higher for MRI than CT. For evaluation of focal liver lesions, the sensitivities of ultrasonography with contrast, CT, and MRI for HCC are similar.PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42014007016).BACKGROUND: Several imaging modalities are available for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).PURPOSE: To evaluate the test performance of imaging modalities for HCC.DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (1998 to December 2014), the Cochrane Library Database, Scopus, and reference lists.STUDY SELECTION: Studies on test performance of ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT), or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).DATA EXTRACTION: One investigator abstracted data, and a second investigator confirmed them; 2 investigators independently assessed study quality and strength of evidence.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84932113757&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84932113757&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.7326/M14-2509

DO - 10.7326/M14-2509

M3 - Article

C2 - 25984845

AN - SCOPUS:84932113757

VL - 162

SP - 697

EP - 711

JO - Annals of Internal Medicine

JF - Annals of Internal Medicine

SN - 0003-4819

IS - 10

ER -