FNH is predicted on the basis of arterial phase centrifugal filling and stellate vascularity on contrast-enhanced sonography. Adenoma is less reliably predicted on the basis of centripetal or mixed filling without stellate vascularity. Sustained portal phase enhancement is more common in FNH than in adenoma but contributes less to the differentiation of these lesions.

Purpose To evaluate the performance of major features, ancillary features, and categories of Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2014 at magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Materials and Methods This retrospective institutional review board-approved study included patients with liver MR imaging and at least one pathologically proved lesion. Between 2004 and 2016, 102 patients (275 observations including 113 HCCs) met inclusion criteria. Two radiologists independently assessed major and ancillary imaging features for each liver observation and assigned a LI-RADS category. Per-lesion estimates of diagnostic performance of major features, ancillary features, and LI-RADS categories were assessed by using generalized estimating equation models. Results Major features (arterial phase hyperenhancement, washout, capsule, and threshold growth) had a sensitivity of 88.5%, 60.6%, 32.9%, and 41.6%, and a specificity of 18.6%, 84.8%, 98.8%, and 83.2% for HCC, respectively. Ancillary features (mild-moderate T2 hyperintensity, restricted diffusion, mosaic architecture, intralesional fat, lesional fat sparing, blood products, and subthreshold growth) had a sensitivity of 62.2%, 54.8%, 9.9%, 30.9%, 23.1%, 2.8%, and 48.3%, and a specificity of 79.4%, 90.6%, 99.4%, 94.2%, 83.1%, 99.3%, and 91.4% for HCC, respectively. The LR-5 or LR-5 V categories had a per-lesion sensitivity of 50.8% and a specificity of 95.8% for HCC, respectively. The LR-4, LR-5, or LR-5 V categories (determined by using major features only vs combination of major and ancillary features) had a per-lesion sensitivity of 75.9% and 87.9% and a per-lesion specificity of 87.5% and 86.2%, respectively. Conclusion The use of ancillary features in combination with major features increases the sensitivity while preserving a high specificity for the diagnosis of HCC.

No abstract

ObjectiveFatty liver deposition is a very common finding, but it has many atypical patterns of distribution that can represent diagnostic pitfalls. The purpose of this pictorial essay is to review different patterns of fatty liver deposition and sparing.MethodsWe searched our archive retrospectively, reviewed the literature, and identified six patterns of liver steatosis.ResultsSteatosis may be diffuse, geographic, focal, subcapsular, multifocal or perivascular.ConclusionsPrevious knowledge of atypical patterns of steatosis distribution may prevent misdiagnosis of infiltrative disease or focal liver lesions. When an unusual form of fatty liver deposition is suspected on ultrasound or computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging may be used to confirm the diagnosis.