2009
DOI: 10.1111/j.1754-9485.2009.02081.x
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Primary hepatic lymphoma: Imaging findings

Abstract: Primary hepatic lymphoma (PHL) is rare, accounting for less than 1% of all extranodal lymphomas. In this article, we retrospectively reviewed the imaging features of 12 pathologically proven cases of primary hepatic lymphoma.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
24
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
1
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Lack of deterministic findings for US and CEUS has been thought to be the reason why only a small number of patients have been reported with an HML. In general, an HML is revealed as a homogeneous hypo-echoic lesion [1][2][3] , and often includes the portal vein or hepatic vein inside of the tumor without invasion (penetrating sign) in conventional US findings [4,5] . Based on the present results, image findings of HML might differ depending on the tumor diameter.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Lack of deterministic findings for US and CEUS has been thought to be the reason why only a small number of patients have been reported with an HML. In general, an HML is revealed as a homogeneous hypo-echoic lesion [1][2][3] , and often includes the portal vein or hepatic vein inside of the tumor without invasion (penetrating sign) in conventional US findings [4,5] . Based on the present results, image findings of HML might differ depending on the tumor diameter.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Evaluations of abdominal ultrasonography (US) findings of primary and secondary tumor-forming hepatic ML (HML) tumors have not been adequately reported. It is generally considered that an HML is revealed as a homogeneous hypo-echoic lesion [1][2][3] that often includes a portal or hepatic vein inside of the tumor without invasion (penetrating sign) [4,5] in conventional US findings. However, a small number of patients with HML shows that there is a lack of deterministic findings in US and contrast-enhanced US (CEUS) examinations.…”
Section: Abdominal Ultrasound Findings Of Tumor-forming Hepatic Maligmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The most common manifestation is a solitary lesion, and the diffuse infiltration is rare and indicates a worse prognosis. The imaging appearance of hepatic lymphoma is non-specific and, on ultrasound, the lesions usually appear hypoechoic with no typical vascularization pattern (3,17). PHL lesions appear as hypoattenuating in CT scans, which may have a low-intensity central area with no enhancement following the administration of an intravenous contrast in half the cases, patchy enhancement in 33% of patients and a ring of enhancement in ~25% of cases (3,17,18).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The imaging appearance of hepatic lymphoma is non-specific and, on ultrasound, the lesions usually appear hypoechoic with no typical vascularization pattern (3,17). PHL lesions appear as hypoattenuating in CT scans, which may have a low-intensity central area with no enhancement following the administration of an intravenous contrast in half the cases, patchy enhancement in 33% of patients and a ring of enhancement in ~25% of cases (3,17,18). Classically, MRI findings in PHL are described as ‘hypointense’ or ‘isointense’ on T1WI, and ‘hyperintense’ on T2WI (3,19).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some mild perilesional enhancement in delayed images, after administration of intravenous contrast, can also be observed. These MRI findings can be helpful for the radiologists to suspect a PHL [23]. Relevant studies also mention that 18FDG PET/CT can further assist to a PHL's diagnosis by demonstrating the absence of pathologically hypermetabolic foci in any other nodes or organs, when CT scan alone is inadequate to differentiate PHL and secondary liver lymphoma [24].…”
Section: Diagnostic Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%