Abstract:PURPOSE:To investigate the use of stiffness value and stiffness ratio (ratio of lesion to background liver parenchyma values) to discriminate malignant from benign focal liver lesions by using histologic results as the reference standard.MATERIALS AND METHODS:This study was approved by the institutional review board, and written informed consent was obtained. Three hundred seventy-three patients with focal liver lesions proven at histologic examination underwent measurement of liver stiffness with elastography point quantification. First, stiffness values in two regions of the background liver parenchyma (at 0.5-2 cm and >2 cm from the lesion periphery) near 163 hepatocellular carcinomas were analyzed to determine a reference background liver for calculating the stiffness ratio. Second, the use of the lesion stiffness value and the stiffness ratio for prediction of liver malignancy was investigated in a cohort of patients with 58 benign and 201 malignant lesions. Results were validated in another independent cohort of patients with 25 benign and 89 malignant lesions by using analysis of the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve.RESULTS:The coefficient of variation for the background liver at 0.5-2 cm from the lesion was higher (196%) than that at greater than 2 cm from the lesion (66%). In the development phase, diagnostic accuracy with use of the stiffness value was significantly higher than that with use of the stiffness ratio for discrimination of malignant from benign lesions (AUC, 0.86 vs 0.66, respectively; P < .001). Diagnostic performance with the stiffness value was lower than that with the stiffness ratio (AUC, 0.53 vs 0.86, respectively; P < .001) for discrimination of cirrhotic nodules from other benign lesions. Diagnostic performance with the stiffness value was significantly lower than that with the stiffness ratio (AUC, 0.58 vs 0.71 respectively; P = .007) for discrimination of metastasis from primary liver cancers. In the validation phase, similar findings were revealed for the discrimination of malignant from benign lesions (AUC, 0.87 vs 0.67; P < .001) and discrimination between metastasis and primary liver cancers (AUC, 0.49 vs 0.73; P < .001).CONCLUSION:Use of stiffness values measured in the liver parenchyma at more than 2 cm from the lesion allowed better diagnostic performance than did values measured in a region closer to the tumor. Stiffness value was more accurate than stiffness ratio for differentiation of malignant from benign focal liver lesions, but the stiffness ratio might be useful for subclassification of benign and malignant lesions. Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Strain Elastography Features In Invasive Breast Cancer: Relationship Between Stiffness And Pathological Factors

Invasive Breast Cancer: Relationship between Shear-wave Elastographic Findings and Histologic Prognostic Factors

Evaluation Stiff Rim Sign in Breast Lesions by Shear Wave Elastography with Quantative Values

Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocyte Level Consistently Correlates with Lower Stiffness Measured by Shear-Wave Elastography: Subtype-Specific Analysis of Its Implication in Breast Cancer

Semi-quantitating Stiffness of Breast Solid Lesions in Ultrasonic Elastography

Complex cystic and solid breast lesions: diagnostic performance of conventional ultrasound, strain imaging and point shear wave speed measurement.

Value of strain elastography in the classification diagnosis of US BI-RADS 4 A breast pathologic lesion

The value of peri-lesional tissue stiffness and stiff rim sign in the differential diagnosis between benign and malignant breast lesions

Tumor Stiffness Measurement at Multifrequency MR Elastography to Predict Lymphovascular Space Invasion in Endometrial Cancer

Stiffness Could Be a Predictor of AJCC Prognostic Stage Groups in Preoperative Invasive Ductal Carcinoma

Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Stiffness Value and Ratio to Discriminate Malignant from Benign Focal Liver Lesions.

Role Of Strain Elastography And Virtual Touch Tissue Quantification Technique In The Diagnosis Of Breast Solid Lesions

Evaluation of Tissue Stiffness Around Lesions by Sound Touch Shear Wave Elastography in Breast Malignancy Diagnosis

Correlation analysis between shear-wave elastography and pathological profiles in breast cancer

3D MR elastography-based stiffness as a marker for predicting tumor grade and subtype in cervical cancer

Correlation between histopathological grading and shear-wave elastography in evaluating invasive carcinoma of no special type

Stiffness of the Surrounding Tissue of Breast Lesions Evaluated by Ultrasound Elastography

Viscoelastic parameters of invasive breast cancer in correlation with porous structure and elemental analysis data

Can Measuring Perilesional Tissue Stiffness and Stiff Rim Sign Improve the Diagnostic Performance Between Benign and Malignant Breast Lesions?

Correlation of shear-wave elastography parameters with the molecular subtype and axillary lymph node status in breast cancer

The Utility of Quantitative Parameters of Shear-Wave Elastography to Predict Prognostic Histologic Features of Breast Cancer