You are viewing the site in preview mode

Skip to main content

Table 4 Comparison of qualitative and quantitative Gd-DTPA enhancement MR imaging features according to MVI

From: MRI features predict microvascular invasion in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

 MVI-positive (n = 34)MVI-negative (n = 74)P value
Dynamic enhancement pattern  0.870
 Progressive27 (79.41)56 (75.68) 
 Wash in-wash out4 (11.76)9 (12.16) 
 Other3 (8.82)9 (12.16) 
Arterial phase enhancement pattern  0.008
 Edged enhancement (ring high signal)28 (82.35)62 (83.78) 
 Overall enhancement (high signal)1 (2.94)11 (14.86) 
 Partial enhancement (mixed signal)2 (5.88)0 (0) 
 No/mild enhancement (low signal)3 (8.82)1 (1.35) 
Dot−/band-like enhancement inside the tumor26 (76.47)44 (59.46)0.086
Absent8 (23.53)30 (40.54) 
Visible vessel penetration25 (73.53)42 (56.76)0.095
Absent9 (26.47)32 (43.24) 
Visible hepatic artery penetration12 (35.29)6 (8.11)0.000
Absent22 (64.71)68 (91.89) 
Visible portal vein penetration15 (44.12)29 (39.19)0.628
Absent19 (55.88)45 (60.81) 
Visible hepatic vein penetration17 (50)25 (33.78)0.108
Absent17 (50)49 (66.22) 
Peripheral hepatic enhancement18 (52.94)43 (58.11)0.615
Absent16 (47.06)31 (41.89) 
Maximum diameter (cm)a6.38 ± 3.064.45 ± 2.130.0003
 Maximum diameter ≤ 5 cmb13 (38.24)48 (64.86)0.010
 Maximum diameter > 5 cm21 (61.76)26 (35.14) 
Maximum enhancement edge-thickness in arterial phase (mm)b3.95 (2.5, 14.3)8.9 (3.8, 17.1)0.0538
Arterial enhanced edge integrity16 (47.06)47 (63.51)0.107
Arterial enhanced edge is incomplete18 (52.94)27 (36.49) 
Arterial edge enhancement ratio (%)b9.47 (4.26, 27.22)21.48 (11.46, 42.19)0.0002
Delayed phase enhancement ratio  1.000
 0 ≤ R < 1/45 (14.71)10 (13.51) 
 1/4 ≤ R < 2/41 (2.94)2 (2.70) 
 2/4 ≤ R < 3/45 (14.71)10 (13.51) 
 3/4 ≤ R ≤ 4/423 (67.65)52 (70.27) 
  1. The data are presented as the number (%) of patients
  2. aData are shown as the means±standard deviation. bData are shown as the median (25% percentile, 75% percentile)