Purpose: This study aimed to determine whether micro-flow imaging (MFI) offers diagnostic performance comparable to that of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in detecting segmental congestion among patients undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Methods: Data from 63 patients who underwent LDLT between May and December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. MFI and CEUS data collected on the first postoperative day were quantified. Segmental congestion was assessed based on imaging findings and laboratory data, including liver enzymes and total bilirubin levels. The reference standard was a postoperative contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan performed within 2 weeks of surgery. Additionally, a subgroup analysis examined patients who underwent reconstruction of the middle hepatic vein territory. Results: The sensitivity and specificity of MFI were 73.9% and 67.5%, respectively. In comparison, CEUS demonstrated a sensitivity of 78.3% and a specificity of 75.0%. These findings suggest comparable diagnostic performance, with no significant differences in sensitivity (P=0.655) or specificity (P=0.257) between the two modalities. Additionally, early postoperative laboratory values did not show significant differences between patients with and without congestion. The subgroup analysis also indicated similar diagnostic performance between MFI and CEUS. Conclusion MFI without contrast enhancement yielded results comparable to those of CEUS in detecting segmental congestion after LDLT. Therefore, MFI may be considered a viable alternative to CEUS.

Purpose: This study aimed to determine whether micro-flow imaging (MFI) offers diagnostic performance comparable to that of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in detecting segmental congestion among patients undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Methods: Data from 63 patients who underwent LDLT between May and December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. MFI and CEUS data collected on the first postoperative day were quantified. Segmental congestion was assessed based on imaging findings and laboratory data, including liver enzymes and total bilirubin levels. The reference standard was a postoperative contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan performed within 2 weeks of surgery. Additionally, a subgroup analysis examined patients who underwent reconstruction of the middle hepatic vein territory. Results: The sensitivity and specificity of MFI were 73.9% and 67.5%, respectively. In comparison, CEUS demonstrated a sensitivity of 78.3% and a specificity of 75.0%. These findings suggest comparable diagnostic performance, with no significant differences in sensitivity (P=0.655) or specificity (P=0.257) between the two modalities. Additionally, early postoperative laboratory values did not show significant differences between patients with and without congestion. The subgroup analysis also indicated similar diagnostic performance between MFI and CEUS. Conclusion MFI without contrast enhancement yielded results comparable to those of CEUS in detecting segmental congestion after LDLT. Therefore, MFI may be considered a viable alternative to CEUS.

Purpose: This study aimed to determine whether micro-flow imaging (MFI) offers diagnostic performance comparable to that of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in detecting segmental congestion among patients undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Methods: Data from 63 patients who underwent LDLT between May and December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. MFI and CEUS data collected on the first postoperative day were quantified. Segmental congestion was assessed based on imaging findings and laboratory data, including liver enzymes and total bilirubin levels. The reference standard was a postoperative contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan performed within 2 weeks of surgery. Additionally, a subgroup analysis examined patients who underwent reconstruction of the middle hepatic vein territory. Results: The sensitivity and specificity of MFI were 73.9% and 67.5%, respectively. In comparison, CEUS demonstrated a sensitivity of 78.3% and a specificity of 75.0%. These findings suggest comparable diagnostic performance, with no significant differences in sensitivity (P=0.655) or specificity (P=0.257) between the two modalities. Additionally, early postoperative laboratory values did not show significant differences between patients with and without congestion. The subgroup analysis also indicated similar diagnostic performance between MFI and CEUS. Conclusion MFI without contrast enhancement yielded results comparable to those of CEUS in detecting segmental congestion after LDLT. Therefore, MFI may be considered a viable alternative to CEUS.

Purpose: This study aimed to determine whether micro-flow imaging (MFI) offers diagnostic performance comparable to that of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in detecting segmental congestion among patients undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Methods: Data from 63 patients who underwent LDLT between May and December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. MFI and CEUS data collected on the first postoperative day were quantified. Segmental congestion was assessed based on imaging findings and laboratory data, including liver enzymes and total bilirubin levels. The reference standard was a postoperative contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan performed within 2 weeks of surgery. Additionally, a subgroup analysis examined patients who underwent reconstruction of the middle hepatic vein territory. Results: The sensitivity and specificity of MFI were 73.9% and 67.5%, respectively. In comparison, CEUS demonstrated a sensitivity of 78.3% and a specificity of 75.0%. These findings suggest comparable diagnostic performance, with no significant differences in sensitivity (P=0.655) or specificity (P=0.257) between the two modalities. Additionally, early postoperative laboratory values did not show significant differences between patients with and without congestion. The subgroup analysis also indicated similar diagnostic performance between MFI and CEUS. Conclusion MFI without contrast enhancement yielded results comparable to those of CEUS in detecting segmental congestion after LDLT. Therefore, MFI may be considered a viable alternative to CEUS.

Purpose: This study aimed to determine whether micro-flow imaging (MFI) offers diagnostic performance comparable to that of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in detecting segmental congestion among patients undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Methods: Data from 63 patients who underwent LDLT between May and December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. MFI and CEUS data collected on the first postoperative day were quantified. Segmental congestion was assessed based on imaging findings and laboratory data, including liver enzymes and total bilirubin levels. The reference standard was a postoperative contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan performed within 2 weeks of surgery. Additionally, a subgroup analysis examined patients who underwent reconstruction of the middle hepatic vein territory. Results: The sensitivity and specificity of MFI were 73.9% and 67.5%, respectively. In comparison, CEUS demonstrated a sensitivity of 78.3% and a specificity of 75.0%. These findings suggest comparable diagnostic performance, with no significant differences in sensitivity (P=0.655) or specificity (P=0.257) between the two modalities. Additionally, early postoperative laboratory values did not show significant differences between patients with and without congestion. The subgroup analysis also indicated similar diagnostic performance between MFI and CEUS. Conclusion MFI without contrast enhancement yielded results comparable to those of CEUS in detecting segmental congestion after LDLT. Therefore, MFI may be considered a viable alternative to CEUS.

Objective: To compare the therapeutic outcomes of laparoscopic hepatic resection (LHR) and laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation (LRFA) for single subcapsular hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Materials and Methods: We screened 244 consecutive patients who had received either LHR or LRFA between January 2014 and December 2016. The feasibility of LRFA in patients who underwent LHR was retrospectively assessed by two interventional radiologists. Finally, 60 LRFA-feasible patients who had received LHR and 29 patients who had received LRFA as the first treatment for a solitary subcapsular HCC between 1 cm and 3 cm were finally included. We compared the therapeutic outcomes, including local tumor progression (LTP), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) between the two groups before and after propensity score (PS) matching. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression was also used to evaluate the difference in OS and RFS between the two groups for all 89 patients. Results: PS matching yielded 23 patients in each group. The cumulative LTP and OS rates were not significantly different between the LHR and LRFA groups after PS matching (p = 0.900 and 0.003, respectively). The 5-year LTP rates were 4.6% and 4.4%, respectively, and OS rates were 100% and 90.7%, respectively. The RFS rate was higher in LHR group without statistical significance (p = 0.070), with 5-year rates of 78.3% and 45.3%, respectively. OS was not significantly different between the LHR (reference) and LRFA groups in multivariable analyses, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.33 (95% confidence interval, 0.12–1.54) (p = 0.818). RFS was higher in LHR (reference) than in LRFA without statistical significance in multivariable analysis, with an HR of 2.01 (0.87–4.66) (p = 0.102). Conclusion There was no significant difference in therapeutic outcomes between LHR and LRFA for single subcapsular HCCs measuring 1–3 cm. The difference in RFS should be further evaluated in a larger study.

Objective: To compare the outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) using dual switching monopolar (DSM), switching bipolar (SB), and combined DSM + SB modes at two different interelectrode distances (25 and 20 mm) in an ex vivo study, which simulated ablation of a 2.5-cm virtual hepatic tumor. Materials and Methods: A total of 132 ablation zones were created (22 ablation zones for each protocol) using three separable clustered electrodes. The performances of the DSM, SB, and combined DSM + SB ablation modes were compared by evaluating the following parameters of the RFA zones at two interelectrode distances: shape (circularity), size (diameter and volume), peritumoral ablative margins, and percentages of the white zone at the midpoint of the two electrodes (ablative margin at midpoint, AMm) and in the electrode path (ablative margin at electrode path, AMe). Results: At both distances, circularity was the highest in the SB mode, followed by the DSM + SB mode, and was the lowest in the DSM mode. The circularity of the ablation zone showed a significant difference among the three energy groups (p < 0.001 and p = 0.002 for 25-mm and 20-mm, respectively). All size measurements, AMm, and AMe were the greatest in the DSM mode, followed by the DSM + SB mode, and the lowest were with the SB mode (all statistically significant). The white zone proportion in AMm and AMe were the greatest in the SB mode, followed by the DSM + SB mode and DSM in general. Conclusion DSM and SB appear to be complementary in creating an ideal ablation zone. RFA with the SB mode can efficiently eradicate tumors and create a circular ablation zone, while DSM is required to create a sufficient ablative margin and a large ablation zone.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS) and overall survival (OS) after percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for solitary colorectal liver metastases (CLM) <3 cm and to identify the risk factors associated with poor LTPFS and OS after percutaneous RFA. Methods: This study screened 219 patients who underwent percutaneous RFA for CLM between January 2013 and November 2020. Of these, 92 patients with a single CLM <3 cm were included. LTPFS and OS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the differences between curves were compared using the log-rank test. Risk factors for LTPFS and OS were assessed using Cox proportional-hazard regression models. Results: Technical efficacy was achieved in the first (n=91) or second (n=1) RFA sessions. During the follow-up (median, 20.0 months), cumulative LTPFS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 92.4%, 83.4%, and 76.5%, respectively. During the follow-up (median, 27.8 months), the corresponding OS rates were 97.5%, 81.3%, and 74.8%, respectively. In multivariable Cox regression analyses, the group with both tumor-puncturing RFA and a T4 stage primary tumor (hazard ratio, 3.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 10.2; P=0.037) had poor LTPFS. In the univariable analysis, no factors were significantly associated with poor OS. Conclusion Both LTPFS and OS were promising after percutaneous RFA for a single CLM <3 cm. The group with both tumor-puncturing RFA and a T4 stage primary tumor showed poor LTPFS. No risk factors were identified for poor OS.

Purpose: This study investigated which body position is more useful for visualizing subphrenic hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) during ultrasonography (US) examinations. Methods: This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board and written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Twenty consecutive patients with a single subphrenic HCC (treatment-naïve, 1 to 3 cm) underwent a US examination for planning radiofrequency ablation. The examinations were done by one of three radiologists and the patients were examined in four different body positions-supine, right posterior oblique (RPO), left lateral decubitus (LLD), and semi-erect-by being positioned on a tilted table. The visibility of the index tumor was prospectively assessed using a 4-point scale. Needle insertion was considered to be technically feasible if the visibility score was lower than 2. The visibility score and technical feasibility were compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test and the McNemar test, respectively, for pairwise comparisons between different body positions. Results: The visibility score was significantly lower in the semi-erect position (median, 2; interquartile range, 1 to 2.75) than in the supine (3, 2 to 4), RPO (3, 2 to 4), and LLD (4, 3.25 to 4) positions (P=0.007, P=0.005, and P=0.001, respectively). The technical feasibility of needle insertion was also significantly higher in the semi-erect position (75%, 15/20) than in the supine (45%, 9/45), RPO (35%, 7/20), and LLD (20%, 4/20) positions (P=0.031, P=0.021, and P=0.001, respectively). Conclusion The semi-erect position is more useful for the visualization of subphrenic HCCs than the supine, RPO, or LLD positions.

Objective: To intraindividually compare hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) washout between MRIs using hepatobiliary agent (HBA) and extracellular agent (ECA). Materials and Methods: This study included 114 prospectively enrolled patients with chronic liver disease (mean age, 55 ± 9 years; 94 men) who underwent both HBA-MRI and ECA-MRI before surgical resection for HCC between November 2016 and May 2019. For 114 HCCs, the lesion-to-liver visual signal intensity ratio (SIR) using a 5-point scale (-2 to +2) was evaluated in each phase. Washout was defined as negative visual SIR with temporal reduction of visual SIR from the arterial phase. Illusional washout (IW) was defined as a visual SIR of 0 with an enhancing capsule. The frequency of washout and MRI sensitivity for HCC using LR-5 or its modifications were compared between HBA-MRI and ECA-MRI. Subgroup analysis was performed according to lesion size (< 20 mm or ≥ 20 mm). Results: The frequency of portal venous phase (PP) washout with HBA-MRI was comparable to that of delayed phase (DP) washout with ECA-MRI (77.2% [88/114] vs. 68.4% [78/114]; p = 0.134). The frequencies were also comparable when IW was allowed (79.8% [91/114] for HBA-MRI vs. 81.6% [93/114] for ECA-MRI; p = 0.845). The sensitivities for HCC of LR-5 (using PP or DP washout) were comparable between HBA-MRI and ECA-MRI (78.1% [89/114] vs. 73.7% [84/114]; p = 0.458). In HCCs < 20 mm, the sensitivity of LR-5 was higher on HBA-MRI than on ECA-MRI (70.8% [34/48] vs. 50.0% [24/48]; p = 0.034). The sensitivity was similar to each other if IW was added to LR-5 (72.9% [35/48] for HBA-MRI vs. 70.8% [34/48] for ECA-MRI; p > 0.999). Conclusion Extracellular phase washout for HCC diagnosis was comparable between MRIs with both contrast agents, except for tumors < 20 mm. Adding IW could improve the sensitivity for HCC on ECA-MRI in tumors < 20 mm.