
==== Front
Insights Imaging
Insights Imaging
Insights into Imaging
1869-4101
Springer Vienna Vienna

1745
10.1186/s13244-024-01745-1
Educational Review
I thought it was a hemangioma! A pictorial essay about common and uncommon liver hemangiomas’ mimickers
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4477-8944
Bonatti Matteo matteobonatti@hotmail.com

1
Valletta Riccardo 1
Corato Valentina 1
Gorgatti Tommaso 1
Posteraro Andrea 1
Vingiani Vincenzo 1
Lombardo Fabio 2
Avesani Giacomo 3
Mega Andrea 4
Zamboni Giulia A. 5
1 Department of Radiology, Hospital of Bolzano (SABES-ASDAA), Teaching Hospital of Paracelsus Medical University (PMU), Bolzano, Italy
2 https://ror.org/010hq5p48 grid.416422.7 0000 0004 1760 2489 Department of Radiology, IRCCS Ospedale Sacro Cuore - Don Calabria, Negrar (VR), Italy
3 grid.414603.4 Department of Radiology, Radiation Oncology and Hematology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario, A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
4 Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital of Bolzano (SABES-ASDAA), Teaching Hospital of Paracelsus Medical University (PMU), Bolzano, Italy
5 https://ror.org/039bp8j42 grid.5611.3 0000 0004 1763 1124 Department of Diagnostics and Public Health, Institute of Radiology, University of Verona, Policlinico GB Rossi, P.Le LA Scuro 10, 37134 Verona, Italy
19 9 2024
19 9 2024
12 2024
15 22811 3 2024
16 6 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Abstract

Focal liver lesions are frequently encountered during imaging studies, and hemangiomas represent the most common solid liver lesion. Liver hemangiomas usually show characteristic imaging features that enable characterization without the need for biopsy or follow-up. On the other hand, there are many benign and malignant liver lesions that may show one or more imaging features resembling hemangiomas that radiologists must be aware of. In this article we will review the typical imaging features of liver hemangiomas and will show a series of potential liver hemangiomas’ mimickers, giving radiologists some hints for improving differential diagnoses.

Critical relevance statement

The knowledge of imaging features of potential liver hemangiomas mimickers is fundamental to avoid misinterpretation.

Key Points

Liver hemangiomas typically show imaging features that enable avoiding a biopsy.

Many benign and malignant liver lesions show imaging features resembling hemangiomas.

Radiologists must know the potentially misleading imaging features of hemangiomas’ mimickers.

Graphical Abstract

Key words

Liver neoplasms
Hemangioma
MRI
CT
Differential diagnosis
issue-copyright-statement© European Society of Radiology (ESR) 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Liver hemangiomas represent the most common primary benign liver tumor, with a prevalence of 2–20% in autoptic studies and a female-to-male ratio of 2:1–5:1 [1–3]. Hemangiomas are increasingly encountered in everyday clinical practice because of the huge amount of performed imaging studies. According to published series, hemangiomas may be detected in 5% of CT examinations and in 2–4% of US examinations [4–6]. Hemangiomas have peculiar imaging features that enable accurate diagnosis using contrast-enhanced imaging modalities [2]. No percutaneous biopsy or surgical resection is needed in cases of lesions with typical US appearance in nononcological patients with “healthy liver”, as well as in lesions with a typical enhancement pattern [7]. On the other hand, many benign and malignant liver lesions may show misleading imaging features that radiologists must be aware of in order to avoid misdiagnosis [8].

In this article we will review multimodality imaging features of liver hemangiomas and show a series of potential hemangiomas mimickers (Table 1).Table 1 Multimodality imaging features of liver hemangiomas and their mimickers

	US	CT	MRI	Contrast enhancement	
Cavernous hemangioma	Homogeneously hyperechoic with acoustic enhancement	Hypodense	Hypointense on T1, markedly hyperintense on T2, no diffusion restriction (shine through artifact), hypointense on HBP	Peripheral globular arterial enhancement with progressive centripetal filling (vessels-like)	
Capillary hemangioma	Usually homogeneously hyperechoic with acoustic enhancement	Iso/hypodense	Hypointense on T1, markedly hyperintense on T2, no diffusion restriction, hypointense on HBP	Rapid complete arterial enhancement without washout (vessels-like)	
Focal nodular hyperplasia	Iso/slightly hypointense; spoke-wheel pattern at Doppler	Slightly hypodense	Isointense on T1, slightly hyperintense on T2, no diffusion restriction, isointense ± hyperintense rim on HBP	Rapid arterial enhancement (centrifugal) with subsequent iso-enhancement; on CT/MRI, central scar with delayed enhancement	
Focal Hepatic steatosis	Hyperechoic, ill-defined, no acoustic enhancement	Hypodense	Signal drop on out-of-phase T1, isointense on T2, no lesion on DWI, isointense on HBP	Iso-enhancement	
Inflammatory hepatocellular adenoma	Hyperechoic surrounded by hypoechoic halo	Variable	Iso/hyperintense on T1, heterogeneously hyperintense on T2, variable diffusion restriction, hypointense on HBP (20% iso/hyperintense)	Vivid arterial enhancement followed by iso-enhancement	
Arteriovenous fistula	No solid lesion	No solid lesion	No solid lesion, possible focal flow void	Focal vessel-like enhancement	
Angiomyolipoma	Heterogeneously hyperechoic	Heterogeneously hypodense with fat-density areas	Markedly hyperintense on T1 and T2 with hypointensity after fat saturation; hypointense on HBP	Arterial enhancement of the non-fat components; hypoenhancement of the fat components	
Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma	Intermediate echogenicity surrounded by a hypoechoic halo	Hypodense	Heterogeneously hypointense on T1, heterogeneously hyperintense on T2, peripheral rim of increased diffusion restriction, hypointense on HBP (possible contrast retention!)	Peripheral rim of arterial enhancement with subsequent slow centripetal filling (No central filling on CEUS!)	
Mucinous colorectal metastases	Hyperechoic	Markedly hypodense	Markedly hypointense on T1, markedly hyperintense on T2, no increased diffusion restriction (shine through artifact), hypointense on HBP (possible contrast retention!)	Peripheral rim of arterial enhancement with progressive central filling (No central filling on CEUS!)	
Angiosarcoma	Heterogeneously hyperechoic	Heterogeneously hypodense	Hypointense on T1, heterogeneously hyperintense on T2, peripheral diffusion restriction, hypointense on HBP	Irregular foci of peripheral arterial enhancement with progressive incomplete filling	
Hemangioendothelioma	Heterogeneously hypoechoic	Heterogeneously hypodense	Heterogeneously hypointense on T1, heterogeneously hyperintense on T2, heterogeneous diffusion restriction, hypointense on HBP	Variable, often peripheral arterial enhancement	
HBP hepatobiliary phase

Liver hemangiomas

Histopathologic features

At pathology, liver hemangiomas appear as well-delineated blue-red lesions that tend to collapse on sectioning. They consist of blood-filled vascular spaces lined by a flattened endothelium and supported by fibrous septa. Three histological subtypes of liver hemangiomas have been described [9]. Cavernous hemangiomas are the most common histological subtype and may become very large [10]. They are prevalently constituted by large vascular spaces with minimal amounts of fibrous septa; thrombosis and calcification may be observed, typically in larger lesions. Capillary hemangiomas are usually small ( < 2 cm) and are characterized by small vascular spaces surrounded by extensive connective tissue. Sclerosed hemangiomas are the consequence of extensive fibrosis following thrombosis and obliteration of vascular spaces; they are also known as thrombosed or hyalinized hemangiomas [11].

Typical imaging features

US often represents the first-line imaging modality for evaluating liver hemangiomas. In the US, hemangiomas usually appear as homogeneously hyperechoic solid masses with sharp margins and posterior acoustic enhancement (Fig. 1). This pattern is typical for cavernous hemangiomas because of the high number of interfaces between vascular spaces and fibrous septa and of the slow blood flows, but capillary and sclerosed hemangiomas may appear iso-hypoechoic [12, 13]. Large lesions usually show lobulated margins and tend to become inhomogeneous because of degenerative changes and thrombosis [14, 15]. The adjacent liver parenchyma shows normal echogenicity and no peritumoral halo should be observed.Fig. 1 Typical US findings in cavernous hemangioma. On B-mode US (a) liver hemangioma appears as a well-defined homogeneously hyperechoic mass with posterior acoustic enhancement (arrows). Contrast-enhanced US (b–d) shows a globular centripetal progressive enhancement pattern

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) represents an excellent problem-solving technique in newly US-detected liver hemangiomas. Cavernous hemangiomas typically show peripheral discontinuous globular enhancement during the arterial phase followed by progressive centripetal filling during the portal venous phase leading to iso-enhancement relative to adjacent vessels in the late phase; avascular lacunae may be present [16, 17] (Fig. 1). Capillary hemangiomas show rapid centripetal complete enhancement during the arterial phase. Atypical enhancement patterns may be observed, especially in lesions showing atypical features at the basal US [18].

On CT, liver hemangiomas typically appear hypodense compared to the adjacent parenchyma on unenhanced acquisitions showing density values similar to hilar vessels because of their vascular lacunae [14]. On post-contrast acquisitions, they typically show the same enhancement pattern described for CEUS, i.e., peripheral discontinuous globular arterial enhancement with progressive centripetal filling in cavernous hemangiomas (Fig. 2) and complete arterial filling in capillary hemangiomas [11]. The enhancing globules must show density values like the adjacent vessels [19]. No satellite nodules should be observed, whereas a transient hepatic attenuation difference (THAD) may surround small flash-filling hemangiomas, probably because of the presence of intralesional artero-portal shunts [20].Fig. 2 Typical CT findings in cavernous hemangioma. On unenhanced CT (a) the lesion appears slightly hypodense in comparison to liver parenchyma. After contrast material administration (b, c), an incomplete globular centripetal progressive enhancement pattern should be observed

MRI has the highest accuracy in characterizing liver hemangiomas [14]. MRI protocol for focal liver lesions’ characterization must include at least in/opposite phase T1-weighted sequences, FSE T2-weighted sequences, diffusion-weighted sequences (high b value of at least 800 s/mm2) with ADC map, dynamic gradient echo T1-weighted sequences after liver-specific contrast material injection, including late arterial phase, portal venous phase and equilibrium phase (180 seconds after contrast injection), and hepatobiliary phase gradient echo T1-weighted sequences (10–30 minutes after contrast injection if using Gd-EOB-DTPA, 45–90 minutes after contrast injection if using Gd-BOPTA) [21]. On MRI, hemangiomas appear markedly hyperintense on T2-weighted images (the so-called “light bulb sign”) due to the fluid content of vascular lacunae [22, 23] and hypointense on T1-weighted images. Because of their low cellularity, hemangiomas do not show increased diffusion coefficient restriction on DWI, but shine-through artifacts on high b-value images are common because of the high signal intensity on T2-weighted images. The dynamic enhancement pattern is the same as described for CEUS and CT, i.e., peripheral discontinuous globular arterial enhancement with progressive centripetal filling in cavernous hemangiomas and complete arterial filling in capillary hemangiomas; pseudo-washout may be observed in the equilibrium phase after Gd-EOB-DTPA administration [14]. Hemangiomas appear hypointense in the hepatobiliary phase after hepatospecific contrast material administration due to the absence of hepatocytes, but pseudo-enhancement (i.e., lesion’s signal intensity slightly higher when comparing hepatobiliary phase to pre-contrast T1-weighted images) may be observed because of contrast material persistence within the dilated cavernous vessels [2, 3] (Fig. 3 and S1).Fig. 3 Typical MRI findings in cavernous hemangioma. Liver hemangioma appears markedly hyperintense on T2-weighted images (a) determining shine through artifact on high b value DWI (b) without true diffusion restriction on ADC map (c). The lesion appears hypointense on T1-weighted images (d), shows globular peripheral enhancement in the arterial phase (e) and appears hypointense in the hepatobiliary phase (f)

In non-oncologic patients with a “healthy liver”, US is enough for the diagnosis of characteristic lesions smaller than 3 cm. On the other hand, contrast-enhanced imaging (CEUS, CT, or MRI) is mandatory in US-atypical lesions and in oncologic patients or patients with underlying liver disease [3, 7]. Imaging follow-up is not indicated once the diagnosis is established [3].

Atypical imaging features

Liver hemangiomas may show atypical imaging patterns that do not allow definitive radiological diagnosis and often lead to biopsy to rule out malignancy. The most common atypical hemangioma is the sclerosed subtype, which shows extensive fibrosis substituting vascular spaces [24] determining reduced signal intensity on T2-weighted images (Figure S2). On contrast-enhanced studies there is a loss of the typical peripheral globular enhancement. Moreover, massive fibrotic reaction may determine capsular retraction [25].

Benign mimickers

Focal nodular hyperplasia

Histopathologic features

Focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) is the second most common benign solid liver lesion, and it is also often incidentally detected during imaging studies [8]. According to the WHO, FNH should not be considered a benign neoplasm, but a hyperplastic response of hepatocytes to a pre-existing vascular anomaly [26]. A prominent central feeding artery is usually observed, surrounded by a fibrotic radial fibrous scar and by hypertrophic hepatocytes. The biliary drainage system is often malformed and insufficient.

Typical imaging features

Given its histological composition, FNH has echogenicity, density, and signal intensity like adjacent normal liver. At the US, FNH is often barely recognizable, appearing slightly hypoechoic compared to the adjacent liver. The so-called spoke-wheel pattern may be observed on color-Doppler [27]. On unenhanced CT, FNH is usually slightly hypodense, whereas, on unenhanced MRI, it is often recognizable only on T2-weighted images as a slightly hyperintense lesion. On contrast-enhanced studies, FNH shows hyperenhancement in the arterial phase with a relatively hypo-enhancing central scar, followed by substantial iso-enhancement in the following phases of the dynamic study with central scar relative hyperenhancement. Thanks to its real-time evaluation, CEUS may enable the highlighting of the centrifugal arterial filling of the lesion [28]. On the other hand, MRI with the use of hepatospecific contrast material allows for confirmation of the presence of functioning hepatocytes in the lesion that appear isointense in the hepatobiliary phase with possible hyperintense peripheral rim due to insufficient bile outflow [29–31].

Misleading imaging features

On contrast-enhanced CT and MRI, a solid lesion showing arterial phase hyperenhancement with no wash-out may be misinterpreted as liver hemangioma (Fig. 4); this is particularly true for small FNHs that may resemble capillary hemangiomas.Fig. 4 Focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH). The lesion shows strong arterial enhancement (a), but its signal intensity is lower than adjacent vessels in the portal venous phase (b). Moreover, the lesion appears only mildly hyperintense on T2-weighted images (c). On contrast-enhanced US the lesion appears homogeneously hypervascular in the late arterial phase (f ), but rapid centripetal filling can be depicted in earlier arterial phases (d, e)

Tricks to avoid misinterpretation

FNHs’ enhancement has no globular pattern; in lesions larger than 2 cm, this feature enables to safely exclude the diagnosis of a hemangioma. Moreover, FNHs appear hypointense in comparison to adjacent vessels in portal venous and equilibrium phases, and isointensity is appreciable on hepatobiliary phase MR images. Substantial iso-intensity/density on unenhanced imaging and the absence of a “light bulb sign” on T2-weighted images enable one to exclude the diagnosis of hemangioma in lesions of every size. In the US, FNHs show no hyperechogenicity, and centripetal enhancement may be depicted on CEUS.

Focal hepatic steatosis

Histopathologic features

Focal steatosis refers to an area of increased intrahepatocyte fat content within the liver parenchyma [32, 33]. The most probable pathophysiologic mechanism underlying focal steatosis is the presence of an aberrant vein communicating with intrahepatic portal branches, leading to a focal perfusion change with subsequent metabolic alterations [34].

Typical imaging features

Focal steatosis appears as an ill-defined area of increased echogenicity in the US, usually in a subcapsular location. On unenhanced CT, focal steatosis shows slight hypodensity compared to a healthy liver. Signal intensity drop is observed on out-of-phase phase T1-weighted images, whereas the lesion appears isointense to the adjacent liver on all other MRI sequences [35, 36]. In contrast-enhanced imaging studies, focal steatosis shows the same enhancement dynamic of the adjacent liver in every phase.

Misleading imaging features

Focal hyperechogenicity may be misinterpreted in the US as liver hemangioma (Fig. 5).Fig. 5 Focal steatosis. Focal steatosis appears mildly hyperechoic on B-mode US (a) and shows the same enhancement pattern of the adjacent liver in every phase on contrast-enhanced US (b)

Tricks to avoid misinterpretation

The hyperechoic area has ill-defined margins, no mass-effect, and no acoustic enhancement. In case of doubts, CEUS may be used as a problem-solving technique demonstrating iso-enhancement.

Inflammatory Hepatocellular Adenoma

Histopathologic features

Adenomas are rare benign hepatocellular tumors [37]. The inflammatory subtype (IHA) represents 30-50% of hepatocellular adenomas and is mainly seen in women [38–40]. Histologically, IHA is characterized pleomorphic hepatocytes proliferation with polymorphous inflammatory infiltrates, thickened tortuous arteries, and sinusoidal dilatation; consequently, they have a high bleeding risk. Prominent ductal reaction represents the distinct histological feature, whereas fat content is variable.

Typical imaging features

In the US, IHA mostly appears hyperechoic, surrounded by a hypoechoic halo [41]; CEUS shows a hypervascular pattern, similar to FNH. On unenhanced CT, IHAs show variable density, depending on the presence of hemorrhage [8]. On MRI, IHA usually appears iso/mildly hyperintense on T1-weighted images and heterogeneously hyperintense on T2-weighted images with a peripheral rim of high T2 signal intensity, the so-called “atoll sign” [42]. Mild signal drop on out-of-phase T1-weighted images may be present. In contrast-enhanced imaging studies, IHA shows hyperenhancement in the arterial phase followed by iso-intensity/density during the following phases of the dynamic study. On hepatobiliary phase MR images the lesion is typically hypointense, but iso/hyperintensity may be observed in about 20% of the cases [8].

HNF 1 alpha mutated liver adenomas are the second most common typically have a more prominent signal drop on out-of-phase T1-weighted images, appear mildly hyperintense on T2-weighted images and have a more moderate arterial enhancement with subsequent washout.

Beta catenin mutated, and unclassified liver adenomas are rare and do not have distinctive imaging features.

Misleading imaging features

In the US, hyperechogenicity may be misinterpreted (Fig. 6), as well as the arterial hyperenhancement without washout on contrast-enhanced imaging studies; moreover, some inflammatory adenomas may appear markedly hyperintense on T2-weighted images. Differential diagnosis may be more difficult in the case of small lesions that may show enhancement patterns resembling capillary hemangiomas.Fig. 6 Inflammatory adenoma (biopsy-proven and resected). B-mode US (a) shows a lobulated hyperechoic mass surrounded by a hypoechoic halo. Contrast-enhanced US (b, c) shows homogeneous arterial enhancement without washout. On MRI, the lesion appears isointense on T1-weighted images (d) with a signal drop in the out-of-phase T1-weighted acquisition (e) and slightly hyperintense on T2-weighted images (f). The lesion shows homogeneous enhancement in the arterial phase (g), minimal washout in the portal venous phase (h) and appears hypointense in the hepatobiliary phase (i)

Tricks to avoid misinterpretation

In the US, the presence of a peripheral hypoechoic halo virtually excludes the diagnosis of hemangioma. Moreover, the arterial hyperenhancement on contrast enhanced imaging studies has no globular pattern, which must be present in every hemangioma > 2 cm.

Arteriovenous fistula

Histopathologic features

An arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is an abnormal communication between the hepatic arterial and portal venous systems. The abnormal communication may be the consequence of different physiopathologic mechanisms that may involve the sinusoids, the vasa vasorum located between hepatic artery and portal vein branches, and the interlobular veins [43, 44].

Typical imaging features

Regardless of the AVF’s mechanism, the typical dynamic CT and MRI feature is the presence of nodular arterial hyperenhancement associated with early enhancement of peripheral portal vein branches, preceding main portal vein enhancement. US, CT, and MRI show no solid focal lesions.

Misleading imaging features

Focal arterial hyperenhancement may be misinterpreted as capillary hemangioma (Fig. 7).Fig. 7 Artero-venous fistula. A focal hypervascular nodule (arrow) is appreciable on arterial phase T1-weighted images (a) between an arterial and a portal branch. The nodule shows the same signal intensity of adjacent vessels in portal venous phase (b), but no focal lesion can be delimited on fat-saturated T2-weighted images (c). On US (d) an anechoic round lesion with arterial flow signal on color-Doppler can be observed

Tricks to avoid misinterpretation

No solid lesions are visible on pre-contrast MRI. Doppler US can be used to identify the fistula point.

Angiomyolipoma

Histopathologic features

Angiomyolipoma (AML) is a rare benign tumor with marked female predilection [45]. Patients with multiple AMLs may be affected by tuberous sclerosis [46]. Histologically, AML is a capsulated mesenchymal tumor composed by smooth muscle cells, thick-walled blood vessels, and mature adipose tissue [47].

Typical imaging features

Given its heterogeneous macroscopic fat content, AMLs usually appear heterogeneously hyperechoic on the US, show areas of fat density on unenhanced CT, and appear markedly hyperintense on T1-weighted and T2-weighted images, with correspondent hypointensity after fat saturation. Contrast-enhanced studies show heterogeneous enhancement of the non-fatty components in the arterial phase [6, 47].

Misleading imaging features

Hyperechogenicity on the US, as well as marked T2-hyperintensity and peripheral enhancement on MRI may lead to misinterpretation as liver hemangioma (Fig. 8).Fig. 8 Angiomyolipoma. On B-mode US (a) a heterogeneous hyperechoic lesion is appreciable. The lesion appears markedly hyperintense on T2-weighted images (b) becoming prevalently hypointense after fat saturation (c) because of the macroscopic fatty content. On T1-weighted images (d) the lesion appears heterogeneously hyperintense; the peripheral components resemble a globular enhancement pattern during arterial (e) and portal venous (f) phases

Tricks to avoid misinterpretation

Detection of discrete macroscopic fat components on CT or MRI is crucial to reaching the correct diagnosis; however, attention must be paid to the differential diagnosis with fat-containing malignant lesions (e.g., HCC).

Peliosis

Histopathologic features

Peliosis hepatis is an extremely rare condition characterized by the presence of multiple blood-filled cysts in the liver parenchyma [48]. It is the consequence of hepatocellular necrosis that determines sinusoids’ wall damage and central vein dilatation [49].

Typical imaging features

Given the rarity of these lesions, variable imaging features have been described in different case reports. In the US, the vascular lakes appear hypo-/anechoic with possible flow signal on Doppler examination [50]. On unenhanced CT, the lesions have been mostly described as hypodense, whereas on MRI they usually appear hypointense on T1-weighted images and hyperintense on T2-weighted ones. After contrast material injection, progressive centrifugal enhancement has been mostly described, but the centripetal pattern may also be observed [48].

Misleading imaging features

Given the variable imaging appearance described in the literature, it is not possible to identify peculiar misleading features.

Tricks to avoid misinterpretation

Among the variable imaging features that have been described for peliosis, globular centripetal enhancement has been never observed; therefore, its absence in lesions larger than 2 cm enables to rule out hemangiomas.

Malignant mimickers

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Histopathologic findings

Cholangiocarcinoma (CCC) is the second most common primary liver malignancy after hepatocellular carcinoma, and “mass-forming” represents the most common growth pattern [51–53]. Intrahepatic CCC arises from the epithelium lining second-order bile ducts. Histologically, tumor cells are in the periphery of the tumor, whereas a dense fibrous stroma occupies the central portion.

Typical imaging findings

Mass-forming CCC usually appears as a large lobulated mass with irregular margins and may determine capsular retraction. In the US, mass-forming CCC typically shows intermediate echogenicity surrounded by a hypoechoic halo [54], whereas on unenhanced CT it appears hypodense in comparison to the adjacent liver. Given its histologic composition, on MRI, the lesion usually shows a T2-hyperintense peripheric rim with increased diffusion restriction associated to a T2-hypointense core with no increased diffusion restriction. On contrast-enhanced CT and MRI, mass-forming CCC shows a peripheral rim enhancement in the arterial phase, which in fact is completely different of the globular pattern observed in hemangiomas, followed by gradual irregular centripetal enhancement during the following phases of the dynamic study [53, 55], whereas on CEUS, given the pure intravascular distribution of the contrast material, arterial peripheral enhancement is not followed by centripetal filling of the fibrotic tissue [56]. During hepatobiliary phase MRI, the fibrotic tissue may retain contrast given its large extracellular spaces [57].

Misleading imaging features

The presence of peripheral enhancement followed by centripetal filling on CT and MRI may be misinterpreted as liver hemangioma (Fig. 9).Fig. 9 Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (biopsy-proven and resected). The lesion shows heterogeneous signal intensity on T2-weighted images (a) with peripheral hyperintensity associated with central hypointensity. During the dynamic study, peripheral rim enhancement is appreciable in the arterial phase (b), followed by centripetal filling in the portal venous (c) and equilibrium (d) phase

Tricks to avoid misinterpretation

Although being centripetal, the enhancement pattern is not globular and is more ring-like. The lesion appears mainly hypointense on T2-weighted images. Increased diffusion restriction should not be present in hemangiomas.

Mucinous colorectal metastases

Histopathologic features

The mucinous variant represents 5–15% of colorectal cancers [58] and is histologically characterized by the presence of at least 50% of extracellular mucin pools [59, 60].

Typical imaging features

Imaging features of mucinous colorectal liver metastases are the direct consequence of their high mucin content. Mucinous colorectal metastases typically appear hyperechoic on the US [61], markedly hypodense on unenhanced CT, and markedly hyperintense on T2-weighted images with shine-through artefact con DWI and hyperintensity on the ADC map. On CT and MRI, peripheral rim enhancement in the arterial phase followed by centripetal filling is usually recognizable, whereas on CEUS peripheral rim enhancement is not followed by centripetal filling. The mucinous material, given its large extracellular spaces, may retain contrast on hepatobiliary phase MRI.

Misleading imaging features

Hyperechogenicity in the US, marked T2-weighted hyperintensity on MRI, and peripheral arterial enhancement with centripetal filling, both on CT and MRI, may lead to misdiagnosis (Fig. 10).Fig. 10 Mucinous colorectal cancer metastasis (biopsy-proven and resected). The lesion appears heterogeneously hyperechoic on B-mode US (a). On CT the lesion appears markedly hypodense in the native phase (b) and shows progressive enhancement in the portal venous (c) and equilibrium (d) phase. On MRI the lesion appears markedly hyperintense on T2-weighted images (e), determining shine through artifact on high b-value DWI (f) without true diffusion coefficient restriction on ADC map (g). The lesion shows peripheral enhancement in late arterial phase (h) with progressive centripetal filling in portal venous phase (i). In hepatobiliary phase (j) the central component shows contrast material retention

Tricks to avoid misinterpretation

Peripheral arterial enhancement without globular pattern enables to exclude the possibility of a hemangioma.

Angiosarcoma

Histopathologic features

Angiosarcoma is a rare mesenchymal hepatic malignant tumor, accounting for less than 2% of all primary liver neoplasms [62]. Histologically, it consists of fusiform or pleomorphic cells developing in pre-existing vascular spaces. Angiosarcoma is often multifocal at the time of the diagnosis and extra-hepatic localizations, typically within the spleen and lungs, are usually present.

Typical imaging features

In the US, angiosarcoma appears heterogeneously hyperechoic, and intralesional cystic spaces are usually present. Angiosarcoma appears heterogeneously hypodense on CT and heterogeneously hyperintense on T2-weighted images with a heterogeneous increase of diffusion restriction [63]. The lesions show irregularly shaped intralesional or peripheral foci of enhancement during the arterial phase, with progressive incomplete enhancement on portal venous and delayed phases, both on CT and MRI.

Misleading imaging features

The foci of arterial enhancement might in some way simulate liver hemangiomas’ enhancement globules both on CT and MRI (Fig. 11).Fig. 11 Angiosarcoma (biopsy-proven). B-mode US (a) shows an ill-defined hyperechoic lesion with multiple cystic lacunae. Multiple discrete foci of increased enhancement are appreciable on arterial phase CT (b). On T2-weighted images (c) two large heterogeneously hyperintense lesions and at least to homogeneously hyperintense satellite nodules are appreciable. The lesions show peripheral foci of increased enhancement in the arterial phase (d) followed by centripetal filling with multiple avascular lacune in the portal venous phase (e)

Tricks to avoid misinterpretation

The arterial enhancement foci lose their eventual globular shape during the following phases of the dynamic studies. Irregular avascular areas and perilesional satellite nodules are usually present. T2-hyperintensity is mild and heterogeneous.

Hemangioendothelioma

Histopathologic features

Hemangioendothelioma is a rare, malignant sarcomatous tumor of endothelial origin [64]. Histologically, the vacuolated endothelial cells are arranged in short cords and strands in a background of myxohyaline stroma [65]. Multiple lesions are usually present at the time of diagnosis.

Typical imaging features

The lesions usually show heterogeneous density on CT and heterogeneous signal intensity on MRI [66–68]. On contrast-enhanced imaging, various patterns have been described [69]: (a) peripheral nodular arterial enhancement followed by wash-out, (b) rim-like arterial enhancement with wash-out during the portal venous phase, and (c) inversed target sign with/without wash-out during the portal venous phase.

Misleading imaging features

Enhancement pattern during the arterial phase may be misinterpreted (Fig. 12).Fig. 12 Hemangioendothelioma (biopsy-proven). Three markedly hypodense lesions with moderate peripheral enhancement are appreciable in late arterial phase CT (a); mild progressive centripetal filling is recognizable in portal venous (b) and delayed (c) phase, with persisting large hypodense areas

Tricks to avoid misinterpretation

Large avascular lacunae are usually present. The enhancement pattern is not globular.

Conclusions

Liver hemangiomas have many benign and malignant mimickers showing one or more imaging features resembling hemangiomas, but all of them also show imaging features that enable to avoid misinterpretation. The main difficulties in the differential diagnosis between liver hemangiomas and their benign mimickers arise on US examination; in these cases, contrast material administration is fundamental to avoid pitfalls. On the other hand, malignant mimickers mostly show misleading features on contrast-enhanced CT and MRI; in these cases, comprehensive “multiparametric” evaluation of the available imaging features is crucial to achieve a correct diagnosis.

Supplementary information

ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL

Abbreviations

AML Angiomyolipoma

AVF Arteriovenous fistula

CCC Cholangiocarcinoma

FNH Focal nodular hyperplasia

IHA Inflammatory adenoma

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13244-024-01745-1.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Autonomous Province of Bozen/Bolzano - South Tyrol for covering the open access publication costs.

Author contributions

M.B. had the idea for the article. M.B., R.V., and V.C. performed the literature search. All authors drafted and critically revised the work.

Funding

The authors declare that they didn’t receive any funding for the research.

Data availability

All radiological images are available in the Institutional PACS.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

IRB-approved study. The need for informed consent was waived for the use of anonymized radiological images.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Little JM Kenny J Hollands MJ Hepatic Incidentaloma: A Modern Problem World J Surg 1990 14 448 451 10.1007/BF01658665 2166378
Little JM, Kenny J, Hollands MJ (1990) Hepatic Incidentaloma: A Modern Problem. World J Surg 14:448–451. 10.1007/BF016586652166378
2. Klotz T Montoriol P-F Da Ines D Petitcolin V Joubert-Zakeyh J Garcier J-M Hepatic Haemangioma: Common and Uncommon Imaging Features Diagn Intervent Imaging 2013 94 849 859 10.1016/j.diii.2013.04.008
Klotz T, Montoriol P-F, Da Ines D, Petitcolin V, Joubert-Zakeyh J, Garcier J-M (2013) Hepatic Haemangioma: Common and Uncommon Imaging Features. Diagn Intervent Imaging 94:849–859. 10.1016/j.diii.2013.04.008
3. European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) (2016). EASLClinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Benign Liver Tumours. J Hepato 65:386–398. 10.1016/j.jhep.2016.04.001
4. Kaltenbach TE-M Engler P Kratzer W Prevalence of Benign Focal Liver Lesions: Ultrasound Investigation of 45,319 Hospital Patients Abdom Radiol (NY) 2016 41 25 32 10.1007/s00261-015-0605-7 26830608
Kaltenbach TE-M, Engler P, Kratzer W et al (2016) Prevalence of Benign Focal Liver Lesions: Ultrasound Investigation of 45,319 Hospital Patients. Abdom Radiol (NY) 41:25–32. 10.1007/s00261-015-0605-726830608
5. Rungsinaporn K Phaisakamas T Frequency of Abnormalities Detected by Upper Abdominal Ultrasound J Med Assoc Thai 2008 91 1072 1075 18839847
Rungsinaporn K, Phaisakamas T (2008) Frequency of Abnormalities Detected by Upper Abdominal Ultrasound. J Med Assoc Thai 91:1072–107518839847
6. Horta G López M Dotte A [Benign focal liver lesions detected by computed tomography: Review of 1,184 examinations] Rev Med Chil 2015 143 197 202 10.4067/S0034-98872015000200007 25860362
Horta G, López M, Dotte A et al (2015) [Benign focal liver lesions detected by computed tomography: Review of 1,184 examinations]. Rev Med Chil 143:197–202. 10.4067/S0034-9887201500020000725860362
7. Haring MPD Cuperus FJC Duiker EW de Haas RJ de Meijer VE Scoping Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Benign Liver Tumours BMJ Open Gastroenterol 2021 8 e000592 10.1136/bmjgast-2020-000592 34362758
Haring MPD, Cuperus FJC, Duiker EW, de Haas RJ, de Meijer VE (2021) Scoping Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Benign Liver Tumours. BMJ Open Gastroenterol 8:e000592. 10.1136/bmjgast-2020-00059234362758
8. Reizine E Mulé S Luciani A Focal Benign Liver Lesions and Their Diagnostic Pitfalls Radio Clin North Am 2022 60 755 773 10.1016/j.rcl.2022.05.005
Reizine E, Mulé S, Luciani A (2022) Focal Benign Liver Lesions and Their Diagnostic Pitfalls. Radio Clin North Am 60:755–773. 10.1016/j.rcl.2022.05.005
9. Vilgrain V Boulos L Vullierme MP Denys A Terris B Menu Y Imaging of Atypical Hemangiomas of the Liver with Pathologic Correlation Radiographics 2000 20 379 397 10.1148/radiographics.20.2.g00mc01379 10715338
Vilgrain V, Boulos L, Vullierme MP, Denys A, Terris B, Menu Y (2000) Imaging of Atypical Hemangiomas of the Liver with Pathologic Correlation. Radiographics 20:379–397. 10.1148/radiographics.20.2.g00mc0137910715338
10. Yamashita Y Ogata I Urata J Takahashi M Cavernous Hemangioma of the Liver: Pathologic Correlation with Dynamic CT Findings Radiology 1997 203 121 125 10.1148/radiology.203.1.9122378 9122378
Yamashita Y, Ogata I, Urata J, Takahashi M (1997) Cavernous Hemangioma of the Liver: Pathologic Correlation with Dynamic CT Findings. Radiology 203:121–125. 10.1148/radiology.203.1.91223789122378
11. Klotz T, Montoriol P-F, Da Ines D, Petitcolin V, Joubert-Zakeyh J, Garcier J-M (2013) Hepatic Haemangioma Common and Uncommon Imaging features. Diagn Interv Imaging 94:849–859. 10.1016/j.diii.2013.04.008
12. Yu JS Kim MJ Kim KW Hepatic Cavernous Hemangioma: Sonographic Patterns and Speed of Contrast Enhancement on Multiphase Dynamic MR Imaging. AJR AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998 171 1021 1025 10.2214/ajr.171.4.9762989 9762989
Yu JS, Kim MJ, Kim KW et al (1998) Hepatic Cavernous Hemangioma: Sonographic Patterns and Speed of Contrast Enhancement on Multiphase Dynamic MR Imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:1021–1025. 10.2214/ajr.171.4.97629899762989
13. Sandulescu LD Urhut CM Sandulescu SM Ciurea A-M Cazacu SM Iordache S One Stop Shop Approach for the Diagnosis of Liver Hemangioma World J Hepatol 2021 13 1892 1908 10.4254/wjh.v13.i12.1892 35069996
Sandulescu LD, Urhut CM, Sandulescu SM, Ciurea A-M, Cazacu SM, Iordache S (2021) One Stop Shop Approach for the Diagnosis of Liver Hemangioma. World J Hepatol 13:1892–1908. 10.4254/wjh.v13.i12.189235069996
14. Mamone G Di Piazza A Imaging of Hepatic Hemangioma: From A to Z Abdom Radiol (NY) 2020 45 672 691 10.1007/s00261-019-02294-8 31686179
Mamone G, Di Piazza A, Carollo V et al (2020) Imaging of Hepatic Hemangioma: From A to Z. Abdom Radiol (NY) 45:672–691. 10.1007/s00261-019-02294-831686179
15. Caseiro-Alves F Brito J Liver Haemangioma: Common and Uncommon Findings and How to Improve the Differential Diagnosis Eur Radiol 2007 17 1544 1554 10.1007/s00330-006-0503-z 17260159
Caseiro-Alves F, Brito J, Araujo AE et al (2007) Liver Haemangioma: Common and Uncommon Findings and How to Improve the Differential Diagnosis. Eur Radiol 17:1544–1554. 10.1007/s00330-006-0503-z17260159
16. Zarzour JG Porter KK Tchelepi H Robbin ML Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of Benign Liver Lesions Abdom Radiol (NY) 2018 43 848 860 10.1007/s00261-017-1402-2 29167944
Zarzour JG, Porter KK, Tchelepi H, Robbin ML (2018) Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of Benign Liver Lesions. Abdom Radiol (NY) 43:848–860. 10.1007/s00261-017-1402-229167944
17. D’Onofrio M Crosara S De Robertis R Canestrini S Mucelli RP Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of Focal Liver Lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015 205 W56 66 10.2214/AJR.14.14203 26102419
D’Onofrio M, Crosara S, De Robertis R, Canestrini S, Mucelli RP (2015) Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of Focal Liver Lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205:W56–66. 10.2214/AJR.14.1420326102419
18. Quaia E Bartolotta TV Midiri M Cernic S Belgrano M Cova M Analysis of Different Contrast Enhancement Patterns after Microbubble-Based Contrast Agent Injection in Liver Hemangiomas with Atypical Appearance on Baseline Scan Abdom Imaging 2006 31 59 64 10.1007/s00261-005-0358-9 16333704
Quaia E, Bartolotta TV, Midiri M, Cernic S, Belgrano M, Cova M (2006) Analysis of Different Contrast Enhancement Patterns after Microbubble-Based Contrast Agent Injection in Liver Hemangiomas with Atypical Appearance on Baseline Scan. Abdom Imaging 31:59–64. 10.1007/s00261-005-0358-916333704
19. Winterer JT Kotter E Ghanem N Langer M Detection and Characterization of Benign Focal Liver Lesions with Multislice CT Eur Radiol 2006 16 2427 2443 10.1007/s00330-006-0247-9 16724204
Winterer JT, Kotter E, Ghanem N, Langer M (2006) Detection and Characterization of Benign Focal Liver Lesions with Multislice CT. Eur Radiol 16:2427–2443. 10.1007/s00330-006-0247-916724204
20. Kim KW Kim TK Han JK Kim AY Lee HJ Choi BI Hepatic Hemangiomas with Arterioportal Shunt: Findings at Two-Phase CT Radiology 2001 219 707 711 10.1148/radiology.219.3.r01ma05707 11376258
Kim KW, Kim TK, Han JK, Kim AY, Lee HJ, Choi BI (2001) Hepatic Hemangiomas with Arterioportal Shunt: Findings at Two-Phase CT. Radiology 219:707–711. 10.1148/radiology.219.3.r01ma0570711376258
21. Bonatti M De Pretis N Zamboni GA Imaging of Paraduodenal Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review World J Radio 2023 15 42 55 10.4329/wjr.v15.i2.42
Bonatti M, De Pretis N, Zamboni GA et al (2023) Imaging of Paraduodenal Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review. World J Radiol 15:42–55. 10.4329/wjr.v15.i2.42
22. Mamone G Miraglia R The “Light Bulb Sign” in Liver Hemangioma Abdom Radiol (NY) 2019 44 2327 2328 10.1007/s00261-019-01964-x 31020349
Mamone G, Miraglia R (2019) The “Light Bulb Sign” in Liver Hemangioma. Abdom Radiol (NY) 44:2327–2328. 10.1007/s00261-019-01964-x31020349
23. Kania L Guglielmo F Mitchell D Interpreting Body MRI Cases: Classic Findings in Abdominal MRI Abdom Radiol (NY) 2018 43 2790 2808 10.1007/s00261-018-1551-y 29594465
Kania L, Guglielmo F, Mitchell D (2018) Interpreting Body MRI Cases: Classic Findings in Abdominal MRI. Abdom Radiol (NY) 43:2790–2808. 10.1007/s00261-018-1551-y29594465
24. Dane B Shanbhogue K Menias CO Taffel MT The Humbling Hemangioma: Uncommon CT and MRI Imaging Features and Mimickers of Hepatic Hemangiomas Clin Imaging 2021 74 55 63 10.1016/j.clinimag.2020.12.028 33434867
Dane B, Shanbhogue K, Menias CO, Taffel MT (2021) The Humbling Hemangioma: Uncommon CT and MRI Imaging Features and Mimickers of Hepatic Hemangiomas. Clin Imaging 74:55–63. 10.1016/j.clinimag.2020.12.02833434867
25. Da Ines D Petitcolin V Lannareix V [Liver capsule retraction adjacent to a circumscribed liver lesion: review of 26 cases with histological confirmation] J Radiol 2009 90 1067 1074 10.1016/s0221-0363(09)73246-9 19752810
Da Ines D, Petitcolin V, Lannareix V et al (2009) [Liver capsule retraction adjacent to a circumscribed liver lesion: review of 26 cases with histological confirmation]. J Radiol 90:1067–1074. 10.1016/s0221-0363(09)73246-919752810
26. Kondo F Fukusato T Kudo M Pathological diagnosis of benign hepatocellular nodular lesions Based on the New World Health Organization Classification Oncology 2014 87 37 49 10.1159/000368144 25427732
Kondo F, Fukusato T, Kudo M (2014) Pathological diagnosis of benign hepatocellular nodular lesions Based on the New World Health Organization Classification. Oncology 87:37–49. 10.1159/00036814425427732
27. Ronot M Vilgrain V Imaging of benign hepatocellular lesions: current concepts and recent updates Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol 2014 38 681 688 10.1016/j.clinre.2014.01.014 24636468
Ronot M, Vilgrain V (2014) Imaging of benign hepatocellular lesions: current concepts and recent updates. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol 38:681–688. 10.1016/j.clinre.2014.01.01424636468
28. Soussan M Aubé C Bahrami S Boursier J Valla DC Vilgrain V Incidental focal solid liver lesions: diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and MR imaging Eur Radiol 2010 20 1715 1725 10.1007/s00330-009-1700-3 20069427
Soussan M, Aubé C, Bahrami S, Boursier J, Valla DC, Vilgrain V (2010) Incidental focal solid liver lesions: diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and MR imaging. Eur Radiol 20:1715–1725. 10.1007/s00330-009-1700-320069427
29. Seale MK Catalano OA Saini S Hahn PF Sahani DV Hepatobiliary-specific MR contrast agents: role in imaging the liver and biliary tree Radiographics 2009 29 1725 1748 10.1148/rg.296095515 19959518
Seale MK, Catalano OA, Saini S, Hahn PF, Sahani DV (2009) Hepatobiliary-specific MR contrast agents: role in imaging the liver and biliary tree. Radiographics 29:1725–1748. 10.1148/rg.29609551519959518
30. Grazioli L Morana G Federle MP Focal nodular hyperplasia: morphologic and functional information from MR imaging with gadobenate dimeglumine Radiology 2001 221 731 739 10.1148/radiol.2213010139 11719669
Grazioli L, Morana G, Federle MP et al (2001) Focal nodular hyperplasia: morphologic and functional information from MR imaging with gadobenate dimeglumine. Radiology 221:731–739. 10.1148/radiol.221301013911719669
31. Campos JT Sirlin CB Choi J-Y Focal hepatic lesions in Gd-EOB-DTPA enhanced MRI: the atlas Insights Imaging 2012 3 451 474 10.1007/s13244-012-0179-7 22700119
Campos JT, Sirlin CB, Choi J-Y (2012) Focal hepatic lesions in Gd-EOB-DTPA enhanced MRI: the atlas. Insights Imaging 3:451–474. 10.1007/s13244-012-0179-722700119
32. Idilman IS Ozdeniz I Karcaaltincaba M Hepatic steatosis: etiology, patterns, and quantification Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2016 37 501 510 10.1053/j.sult.2016.08.003 27986169
Idilman IS, Ozdeniz I, Karcaaltincaba M (2016) Hepatic steatosis: etiology, patterns, and quantification. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 37:501–510. 10.1053/j.sult.2016.08.00327986169
33. Décarie P-O Lepanto L Billiard J-S Fatty liver deposition and sparing: a pictorial review Insights Imaging 2011 2 533 538 10.1007/s13244-011-0112-5 22347973
Décarie P-O, Lepanto L, Billiard J-S et al (2011) Fatty liver deposition and sparing: a pictorial review. Insights Imaging 2:533–538. 10.1007/s13244-011-0112-522347973
34. Valls C Iannacconne R Alba E Fat in the liver: diagnosis and characterization Eur Radiol 2006 16 2292 2308 10.1007/s00330-006-0146-0 16477402
Valls C, Iannacconne R, Alba E et al (2006) Fat in the liver: diagnosis and characterization. Eur Radiol 16:2292–2308. 10.1007/s00330-006-0146-016477402
35. Basaran C Karcaaltincaba M Akata D Fat-containing lesions of the liver: cross-sectional imaging findings with emphasis on MRI AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005 184 1103 1110 10.2214/ajr.184.4.01841103 15788580
Basaran C, Karcaaltincaba M, Akata D et al (2005) Fat-containing lesions of the liver: cross-sectional imaging findings with emphasis on MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1103–1110. 10.2214/ajr.184.4.0184110315788580
36. Merkle EM Nelson RC Dual gradient-echo in-phase and opposed-phase hepatic MR imaging: a useful tool for evaluating more than fatty infiltration or fatty sparing Radiographics 2006 26 1409 1418 10.1148/rg.265055711 16973772
Merkle EM, Nelson RC (2006) Dual gradient-echo in-phase and opposed-phase hepatic MR imaging: a useful tool for evaluating more than fatty infiltration or fatty sparing. Radiographics 26:1409–1418. 10.1148/rg.26505571116973772
37. Nault J-C Bioulac-Sage P Zucman-Rossi J Hepatocellular benign tumors-from molecular classification to personalized clinical care Gastroenterology 2013 144 888 902 10.1053/j.gastro.2013.02.032 23485860
Nault J-C, Bioulac-Sage P, Zucman-Rossi J (2013) Hepatocellular benign tumors-from molecular classification to personalized clinical care. Gastroenterology 144:888–902. 10.1053/j.gastro.2013.02.03223485860
38. Kim T-H Woo S Ebrahimzadeh S McInnes MDF Gerst SR Do RK Hepatic adenoma subtypes on hepatobiliary phase of gadoxetic acid–enhanced MRI: systematic review and meta-analysis Am J Roentgenol 2023 220 28 38 10.2214/AJR.22.27989 35920706
Kim T-H, Woo S, Ebrahimzadeh S, McInnes MDF, Gerst SR, Do RK (2023) Hepatic adenoma subtypes on hepatobiliary phase of gadoxetic acid–enhanced MRI: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Roentgenol 220:28–38. 10.2214/AJR.22.2798935920706
39. Nault J-C Couchy G Balabaud C Molecular classification of hepatocellular adenoma associates with risk factors, bleeding, and malignant transformation Gastroenterology 2017 152 880 894.e6 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.11.042 27939373
Nault J-C, Couchy G, Balabaud C et al (2017) Molecular classification of hepatocellular adenoma associates with risk factors, bleeding, and malignant transformation. Gastroenterology 152:880–894.e6. 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.11.04227939373
40. Michallek F Sartoris R Beaufrère A Differentiation of hepatocellular adenoma by subtype and hepatocellular carcinoma in non-cirrhotic liver by fractal analysis of perfusion MRI Insights Imaging 2022 13 81 10.1186/s13244-022-01223-6 35482151
Michallek F, Sartoris R, Beaufrère A et al (2022) Differentiation of hepatocellular adenoma by subtype and hepatocellular carcinoma in non-cirrhotic liver by fractal analysis of perfusion MRI. Insights Imaging 13:81. 10.1186/s13244-022-01223-635482151
41. Grazioli L Federle MP Brancatelli G Ichikawa T Olivetti L Blachar A Hepatic adenomas: imaging and pathologic findings Radiographics 2001 21 877 892 10.1148/radiographics.21.4.g01jl04877 11452062
Grazioli L, Federle MP, Brancatelli G, Ichikawa T, Olivetti L, Blachar A (2001) Hepatic adenomas: imaging and pathologic findings. Radiographics 21:877–892. 10.1148/radiographics.21.4.g01jl04877. discussion 892-89411452062
42. Bisig AM Ayoob AR Owen JW Classics in abdominal imaging: the atoll sign Abdom Radiol (NY) 2019 44 1621 1622 10.1007/s00261-018-1821-8 30465102
Bisig AM, Ayoob AR, Owen JW (2019) Classics in abdominal imaging: the atoll sign. Abdom Radiol (NY) 44:1621–1622. 10.1007/s00261-018-1821-830465102
43. Choi BI Lee KH Han JK Lee JM Hepatic arterioportal shunts: dynamic CT and MR features Korean J Radiol 2002 3 1 10.3348/kjr.2002.3.1.1 11919473
Choi BI, Lee KH, Han JK, Lee JM (2002) Hepatic arterioportal shunts: dynamic CT and MR features. Korean J Radiol 3:1. 10.3348/kjr.2002.3.1.111919473
44. Wang Q Koniaris LG Milgrom DP CT and MRI imaging and interpretation of hepatic arterioportal shunts Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019 4 34 10.21037/tgh.2019.05.05 31231701
Wang Q, Koniaris LG, Milgrom DP et al (2019) CT and MRI imaging and interpretation of hepatic arterioportal shunts. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol 4:34. 10.21037/tgh.2019.05.0531231701
45. Cai P Wu Y Xie C Zhang W Han R Wu P Hepatic angiomyolipoma: CT and MR imaging findings with clinical–pathologic comparison Abdom Imaging 2013 38 482 489 10.1007/s00261-012-9932-0 22996326
Cai P, Wu Y, Xie C, Zhang W, Han R, Wu P (2013) Hepatic angiomyolipoma: CT and MR imaging findings with clinical–pathologic comparison. Abdom Imaging 38:482–489. 10.1007/s00261-012-9932-022996326
46. Black ME Hedgire SS Camposano S Paul E Harisinghani M Thiele EA Hepatic manifestations of tuberous sclerosis complex: a genotypic and phenotypic analysis Clin Genet 2012 82 552 557 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2012.01845.x 22251200
Black ME, Hedgire SS, Camposano S, Paul E, Harisinghani M, Thiele EA (2012) Hepatic manifestations of tuberous sclerosis complex: a genotypic and phenotypic analysis. Clin Genet 82:552–557. 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2012.01845.x22251200
47. Huang Z Zhou P Li S Li K Hepatic angiomyolipoma: clinical features and imaging findings of quantitative contrast-enhanced ultrasound perfusion analysis and magnetic resonance imaging J Ultrasound Med 2020 39 2111 2122 10.1002/jum.15316 32383807
Huang Z, Zhou P, Li S, Li K (2020) Hepatic angiomyolipoma: clinical features and imaging findings of quantitative contrast-enhanced ultrasound perfusion analysis and magnetic resonance imaging. J Ultrasound Med 39:2111–2122. 10.1002/jum.1531632383807
48. Crocetti D Palmieri A Pedullà G Pasta V D’Orazi V Grazi GL Peliosis hepatis: personal experience and literature review World J Gastroenterol 2015 21 13188 13194 10.3748/wjg.v21.i46.13188 26675327
Crocetti D, Palmieri A, Pedullà G, Pasta V, D’Orazi V, Grazi GL (2015) Peliosis hepatis: personal experience and literature review. World J Gastroenterol 21:13188–13194. 10.3748/wjg.v21.i46.1318826675327
49. Brancatelli G Vilgrain V Federle MP Budd-Chiari syndrome: spectrum of imaging findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007 188 W168 176, 10.2214/AJR.05.0168 17242224
Brancatelli G, Vilgrain V, Federle MP et al (2007) Budd-Chiari syndrome: spectrum of imaging findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:W168–176,. 10.2214/AJR.05.016817242224
50. Wang SY Ruggles S Vade A Newman BM Borge MA Hepatic rupture caused by peliosis hepatis J Pediatr Surg 2001 36 1456 1459 10.1053/jpsu.2001.26397 11528627
Wang SY, Ruggles S, Vade A, Newman BM, Borge MA (2001) Hepatic rupture caused by peliosis hepatis. J Pediatr Surg 36:1456–1459. 10.1053/jpsu.2001.2639711528627
51. Sheng R, Zhang Y, Wang H et al (2023) A multi-center diagnostic system for intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma based on preoperative MRI and clinical features. Eur Radiol. 10.1007/s00330-023-10002-w
52. Fábrega-Foster K Ghasabeh MA Pawlik TM Kamel IR Multimodality imaging of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr 2017 6 67 78 10.21037/hbsn.2016.12.10 28503554
Fábrega-Foster K, Ghasabeh MA, Pawlik TM, Kamel IR (2017) Multimodality imaging of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr 6:67–78. 10.21037/hbsn.2016.12.1028503554
53. Choi BI Lee JM Han JK Imaging of intrahepatic and hilar cholangiocarcinoma Abdom Imaging 2004 29 548 557 10.1007/s00261-004-0188-1 15185025
Choi BI, Lee JM, Han JK (2004) Imaging of intrahepatic and hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Abdom Imaging 29:548–557. 10.1007/s00261-004-0188-115185025
54. Chung YE Kim M-J Park YN Varying appearances of Cholangiocarcinoma: Radiologic-Pathologic Correlation Radiographics 2009 29 683 700 10.1148/rg.293085729 19448110
Chung YE, Kim M-J, Park YN et al (2009) Varying appearances of Cholangiocarcinoma: Radiologic-Pathologic Correlation. Radiographics 29:683–700. 10.1148/rg.29308572919448110
55. Han JK Choi BI Kim AY Cholangiocarcinoma: pictorial essay of CT and cholangiographic findings Radiographics 2002 22 173 187 10.1148/radiographics.22.1.g02ja15173 11796906
Han JK, Choi BI, Kim AY et al (2002) Cholangiocarcinoma: pictorial essay of CT and cholangiographic findings. Radiographics 22:173–187. 10.1148/radiographics.22.1.g02ja1517311796906
56. Wilson SR Burrowes DP Merrill C Caine BA Gupta S Burak KW Unique portal venous phase imaging discordance between CEUS and MRI: a valuable predictor of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma? Abdom Radiol (NY) 2024 49 11 20 10.1007/s00261-023-04031-8 37804423
Wilson SR, Burrowes DP, Merrill C, Caine BA, Gupta S, Burak KW (2024) Unique portal venous phase imaging discordance between CEUS and MRI: a valuable predictor of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma? Abdom Radiol (NY) 49:11–20. 10.1007/s00261-023-04031-837804423
57. Vernuccio F Gagliano DS Cannella R Ba-Ssalamah A Tang A Brancatelli G Spectrum of liver lesions hyperintense on hepatobiliary phase: an approach by clinical setting Insights Imaging 2021 12 8 10.1186/s13244-020-00928-w 33432491
Vernuccio F, Gagliano DS, Cannella R, Ba-Ssalamah A, Tang A, Brancatelli G (2021) Spectrum of liver lesions hyperintense on hepatobiliary phase: an approach by clinical setting. Insights Imaging 12:8. 10.1186/s13244-020-00928-w33432491
58. Paulatto L Dioguardi Burgio M Sartoris R Colorectal liver metastases: radiopathological correlation Insights Imaging 2020 11 99 10.1186/s13244-020-00904-4 32844319
Paulatto L, Dioguardi Burgio M, Sartoris R et al (2020) Colorectal liver metastases: radiopathological correlation. Insights Imaging 11:99. 10.1186/s13244-020-00904-432844319
59. Reynolds IS Furney SJ Kay EW McNamara DA Prehn JHM Burke JP Meta-analysis of the molecular associations of mucinous colorectal cancer Br J Surg 2019 106 682 691 10.1002/bjs.11142 30945755
Reynolds IS, Furney SJ, Kay EW, McNamara DA, Prehn JHM, Burke JP (2019) Meta-analysis of the molecular associations of mucinous colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 106:682–691. 10.1002/bjs.1114230945755
60. Debunne H Ceelen W Mucinous differentiation in colorectal cancer: molecular, histological and clinical aspects Acta Chir Belg 2013 113 385 390 10.1080/00015458.2013.11680951 24494463
Debunne H, Ceelen W (2013) Mucinous differentiation in colorectal cancer: molecular, histological and clinical aspects. Acta Chir Belg 113:385–39024494463
61. Aoki K Takayasu K Muramatsu Y Moriyama N Matsue H Yamada T [Liver metastases of mucinous colorectal carcinoma: clinico-radiological study of six cases] Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1990 50 1513 1518 1965227
Aoki K, Takayasu K, Muramatsu Y, Moriyama N, Matsue H, Yamada T (1990) [Liver metastases of mucinous colorectal carcinoma: clinico-radiological study of six cases]. Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 50:1513–15181965227
62. Alrenga DP Primary Angiosarcoma of the Liver. Review Article Int Surg 1975 60 198 203 1091575
Alrenga DP (1975) Primary Angiosarcoma of the Liver. Review Article. Int Surg 60:198–2031091575
63. Bruegel M Muenzel D Waldt S Specht K Rummeny EJ Hepatic angiosarcoma: cross-sectional imaging findings in seven patients with emphasis on dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MRI Abdom Imaging 2013 38 745 754 10.1007/s00261-012-9967-2 23223833
Bruegel M, Muenzel D, Waldt S, Specht K, Rummeny EJ (2013) Hepatic angiosarcoma: cross-sectional imaging findings in seven patients with emphasis on dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MRI. Abdom Imaging 38:745–754. 10.1007/s00261-012-9967-223223833
64. Klinger C Stuckmann G Dietrich CF Contrast-enhanced imaging in hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma: retrospective study of 10 patients Z Gastroenterol 2019 57 753 766 10.1055/a-0886-0081 30986884
Klinger C, Stuckmann G, Dietrich CF et al (2019) Contrast-enhanced imaging in hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma: retrospective study of 10 patients. Z Gastroenterol 57:753–766. 10.1055/a-0886-008130986884
65. Hu EY, Bhagavatula SK, Shi A, Merriam P, Levesque VM, Shyn PB (2024). Image-guided percutaneous ablation of hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma. Abdom Radiol (NY), 10.1007/s00261-023-04154-y
66. Tan H Zhou R Yu H CT Appearances and Classification of Hepatic Epithelioid Hemangioendothelioma Insights Imaging 2023 14 56 10.1186/s13244-023-01410-z 37005950
Tan H, Zhou R, Yu H et al (2023) CT Appearances and Classification of Hepatic Epithelioid Hemangioendothelioma. Insights Imaging 14:56. 10.1186/s13244-023-01410-z37005950
67. Luo L Cai Z Zeng S CT and MRI features of hepatic epithelioid haemangioendothelioma: a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of 15 cases and a literature review Insights Imaging 2023 14 2 10.1186/s13244-022-01344-y 36600110
Luo L, Cai Z, Zeng S et al (2023) CT and MRI features of hepatic epithelioid haemangioendothelioma: a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of 15 cases and a literature review. Insights Imaging 14:2. 10.1186/s13244-022-01344-y36600110
68. Wang X Liang P Lv P Li R Hou P Gao J Clinical characteristics and CT features of hepatic epithelioid haemangioendothelioma and comparison with those of liver metastases Insights Imaging 2022 13 9 10.1186/s13244-021-01143-x 35050424
Wang X, Liang P, Lv P, Li R, Hou P, Gao J (2022) Clinical characteristics and CT features of hepatic epithelioid haemangioendothelioma and comparison with those of liver metastases. Insights Imaging 13:9. 10.1186/s13244-021-01143-x35050424
69. Chen Y Yu R-S Qiu L-L Jiang D-Y Tan Y-B Fu Y-B Contrast-enhanced multiple-phase imaging features in hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma World J Gastroenterol 2011 17 3544 3553 10.3748/wjg.v17.i30.3544 21941423
Chen Y, Yu R-S, Qiu L-L, Jiang D-Y, Tan Y-B, Fu Y-B (2011) Contrast-enhanced multiple-phase imaging features in hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma. World J Gastroenterol 17:3544–3553. 10.3748/wjg.v17.i30.354421941423
