UpToDate
Official reprint from UpToDate®
www.uptodate.com ©2016 UpToDate®

Computed tomography of the hepatobiliary tract

Authors
Umaprasanna S Karnam, MD
K Rajender Reddy, MD
Stephan Anderson, MD
Section Editor
Jonathan B Kruskal, MD, PhD
Deputy Editor
Anne C Travis, MD, MSc, FACG, AGAF

INTRODUCTION

Computed tomography (CT) can be used to image the hepatobiliary system, with perhaps the exception of the gallbladder, which is better imaged with ultrasound. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is superior to CT for evaluating the biliary tract, but CT is useful for hepatic imaging and in cases where it is not clear whether a problem is originating in the liver, gallbladder, or bile ducts. CT, like magnetic resonance imaging, allows for a more thorough evaluation of the liver and other abdominal structures than ultrasound, and is less dependent upon operator skills. In contrast to ultrasound, successful CT of the liver can be obtained despite obesity, overlying bowel gas, or ascites.

This topic review will discuss some general principles of CT as it applies to imaging of the hepatobiliary system. A more complete discussion of the technique of CT scanning, MRCP, and hepatobiliary ultrasound can be found separately. (See "Principles of computed tomography of the chest" and "Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography" and "Ultrasonography of the hepatobiliary tract".)

TECHNIQUE

A CT scan is created by passing fine radiographic beams through the patient, with rotating detectors located on the opposite side of the body to record the amount of radiation not attenuated by the tissues being imaged. This information is then processed by a computer that calculates the attenuation values with reference to a standard water value of 0 Hounsfield units.

Intravenous iodinated contrast material is used to opacify vessels and to determine the vascularity of lesions relative to that of normal liver parenchyma. The timing of image acquisition is crucial in hepatic imaging; images should be obtained during an interval of sustained hepatic enhancement before the equilibrium phase is reached (algorithm 1). At equilibrium, lesions may become isodense with the liver parenchyma, and therefore not visible.

Conventional CT scanners obtain a series of individual scans during suspended respiration. This incremental table-patient transport results in respiratory misregistration due to varying breath-holds during scans. Thus, anatomic fields may be omitted and data lost. Conventional CT scan, while a powerful diagnostic tool, is more expensive than ultrasound and involves the risks associated with radiation exposure and intravenous contrast material. (See "Radiation-related risks of imaging studies" and "Pathogenesis, clinical features, and diagnosis of contrast-induced nephropathy" and "Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to radiocontrast media: Clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and treatment".)

      

Subscribers log in here

To continue reading this article, you must log in with your personal, hospital, or group practice subscription. For more information or to purchase a personal subscription, click below on the option that best describes you:
Literature review current through: Nov 2016. | This topic last updated: Tue Apr 05 00:00:00 GMT+00:00 2016.
The content on the UpToDate website is not intended nor recommended as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your own physician or other qualified health care professional regarding any medical questions or conditions. The use of this website is governed by the UpToDate Terms of Use ©2016 UpToDate, Inc.
References
Top
  1. Baron RL. Understanding and optimizing use of contrast material for CT of the liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 163:323.
  2. Itai Y, Matsui O. Blood flow and liver imaging. Radiology 1997; 202:306.
  3. Heiken JP, Brink JA, Vannier MW. Spiral (helical) CT. Radiology 1993; 189:647.
  4. Oliver JH 3rd, Baron RL. Helical biphasic contrast-enhanced CT of the liver: technique, indications, interpretation, and pitfalls. Radiology 1996; 201:1.
  5. Kuszyk BS, Bluemke DA, Urban BA, et al. Portal-phase contrast-enhanced helical CT for the detection of malignant hepatic tumors: sensitivity based on comparison with intraoperative and pathologic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 166:91.
  6. Soyer P, Bluemke DA, Fishman EK. CT during arterial portography for the preoperative evaluation of hepatic tumors: how, when, and why? AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 163:1325.
  7. Ichikawa T, Ohtomo K, Takahashi S. Hepatocellular carcinoma: detection with double-phase helical CT during arterial portography. Radiology 1996; 198:284.
  8. Takayasu K, Muramatsu Y, Furukawa H, et al. Early hepatocellular carcinoma: appearance at CT during arterial portography and CT arteriography with pathologic correlation. Radiology 1995; 194:101.
  9. Irie T, Takeshita K, Wada Y, et al. CT evaluation of hepatic tumors: comparison of CT with arterial portography, CT with infusion hepatic arteriography, and simultaneous use of both techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995; 164:1407.
  10. Oliver JH 3rd, Baron RL, Federle MP, et al. Hypervascular liver metastases: do unenhanced and hepatic arterial phase CT images affect tumor detection? Radiology 1997; 205:709.
  11. Gulliver DJ, Baker ME, Cheng CA, et al. Malignant biliary obstruction: efficacy of thin-section dynamic CT in determining resectability. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992; 159:503.
  12. Wang ZJ, Yeh BM, Roberts JP, et al. Living donor candidates for right hepatic lobe transplantation: evaluation at CT cholangiography--initial experience. Radiology 2005; 235:899.
  13. Kamel IR, Raptopoulos V, Pomfret EA, et al. Living adult right lobe liver transplantation: imaging before surgery with multidetector multiphase CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 175:1141.
  14. Raptopoulos V, Karellas A, Bernstein J, et al. Value of dual-energy CT in differentiating focal fatty infiltration of the liver from low-density masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991; 157:721.
  15. Kamel IR, Kruskal JB, Warmbrand G, et al. Accuracy of volumetric measurements after virtual right hepatectomy in potential donors undergoing living adult liver transplantation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 176:483.