Pericaval fat mimicking intracaval deposits on unenhanced and contrast-enhanced helical, CT in patients with cirrhosis

Citation
Y. Baba et al., Pericaval fat mimicking intracaval deposits on unenhanced and contrast-enhanced helical, CT in patients with cirrhosis, J COMPUT AS, 25(6), 2001, pp. 851-855
Citations number
16
Categorie Soggetti
Radiology ,Nuclear Medicine & Imaging","Medical Research Diagnosis & Treatment
Journal title
JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY
ISSN journal
03638715 → ACNP
Volume
25
Issue
6
Year of publication
2001
Pages
851 - 855
Database
ISI
SICI code
0363-8715(200111/12)25:6<851:PFMIDO>2.0.ZU;2-5
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this work was to determine whether there is it sign ificant difference in radiographic depiction of pericaval fat mimicking int racaval deposits on CT scans in patients with cirrhosis versus those withou t cirrhosis. Method: The incidence of radiographic pseudolesions depicted a s an intracaval fat mass identified on CT scans in 62 patients with cirrhos is was compared with that in 81 patients without cirrhosis. Results: Perica val fat depicted as an intracaval fat mass was identified more frequently i n patients with cirrhosis (20/62, 32%) than in patients without cirrhosis ( 4/81 , 5%), representing a statistically significant difference (p < 0.0001 ). A total of 24 lesions were seen in 20 patients with cirrhosis. Lesions w ere identified at the confluence of the hepatic veins (n = 19), below the c onfluence (n = 4), and above the confluence (n = 1). Pseudolesions appeared round (n = 5), oval (n = 15), or linear (n = 4). Locations included medial (n = 15), posteromedial (n = 4), anteromedial (n = 1), and posterior In = 4). The average length was 1.5 cm. Conclusion: The cause of pseudolesions d epicted as intracaval fat masses on CT is likely secondary to morphologic c hanges in the liver such as cirrhosis.