Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Journal of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology 2023; 06(02): 089-100
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1767727
Original Article

Liver Anatomy and Cross-Sectional Imaging Techniques: A Practical Approach

Parul Samir Garde
1   Department of Radiology and Imaging, Global Hospitals, Mumbai, India
,
Rahul Bhagwan Bhute
2   Department of Radiology and Imaging, King Edward Memorial Hospital Parel, Mumbai, India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

In the past decade or two, there has been a significant change in the epidemiology of liver diseases, such as rise in the incidence of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, good control of viral load in hepatitis B and C related liver diseases, and revolutionary changes in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hence, monitoring of these diseases warrants effective noninvasive imaging techniques. Besides, organ transplantation has evolved to play a major role in the treatment of chronic liver diseases and acute liver failures. With the advent of better technology and new imaging sequences in cross-sectional imaging, there has been a dramatic change in the arena of liver imaging. Knowledge of these imaging modalities and effective application of the existing and new imaging techniques is essential to meet these changing clinical needs. This article aims at revisiting the liver anatomy from a practical stand point and touches upon the key cross-sectional imaging techniques of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging with recent advances.

Keywords

anatomy - cross sectional - imaging - liver


Publication History

Article published online:
17 April 2023

© 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Chernyak V, Fowler KJ, Kamaya A. et al. Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018: imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma in at-risk patients. Radiology 2018; 289 (03) 816-830
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Couinaud C. Le foie: études anatomiques et chirurgicales. Paris: Masson; 1957
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Strasberg SM, Belghiti J, Clavien PA. et al. The Brisbane 2000 terminology of liver anatomy and resections. HPB (Oxford) 2000; 2 (03) 333-339
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Auh YH, Rosen A, Rubenstein WA, Engel IA, Whalen JP, Kazam E. CT of the papillary process of the caudate lobe of the liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1984; 142 (03) 535-538
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Noussios G, Dimitriou I, Chatzis I, Katsourakis A. The main anatomic variations of the hepatic artery and their importance in surgical practice: review of the literature. J Clin Med Res 2017; 9 (04) 248-252
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Gurgacz AM, Horbaczewska A, Klimek-Piotrowska W, Walocha J. Variations in hepatic vascularisation: lack of a proper hepatic artery. Two case reports. Folia Morphol (Warsz) 2011; 70 (02) 130-134
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Koç Z, Oğuzkurt L, Ulusan S. Portal vein variations: clinical implications and frequencies in routine abdominal multidetector CT. Diagn Interv Radiol 2007; 13 (02) 75-80
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Atasoy C, Ozyürek E. Prevalence and types of main and right portal vein branching variations on MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187 (03) 676-681
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Germain T, Favelier S, Cercueil JP, Denys A, Krausé D, Guiu B. Liver segmentation: practical tips. Diagn Interv Imaging 2014; 95 (11) 1003-1016
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Sahani D, Mehta A, Blake M, Prasad S, Harris G, Saini S. Preoperative hepatic vascular evaluation with CT and MR angiography: implications for surgery. Radiographics 2004; 24 (05) 1367-1380
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Soyer P, Bluemke DA, Choti MA, Fishman EK. Variations in the intrahepatic portions of the hepatic and portal veins: findings on helical CT scans during arterial portography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995; 164 (01) 103-108
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Soyer P, Heath D, Bluemke DA. et al. Three-dimensional helical CT of intrahepatic venous structures: comparison of three rendering techniques. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1996; 20 (01) 122-127
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Koc Z, Ulusan S, Oguzkurt L, Tokmak N. Venous variants and anomalies on routine abdominal multi-detector row CT. Eur J Radiol 2007; 61 (02) 267-278
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Castaing D. Surgical anatomy of the biliary tract. HPB (Oxford) 2008; 10 (02) 72-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Huang TL, Cheng YF, Chen CL, Chen TY, Lee TY. Variants of the bile ducts: clinical application in the potential donor of living-related hepatic transplantation. Transplant Proc 1996; 28 (03) 1669-1670
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Wald C, Russo MW, Heimbach JK, Hussain HK, Pomfret EA, Bruix J. New OPTN/UNOS policy for liver transplant allocation: standardization of liver imaging, diagnosis, classification, and reporting of hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiology 2013; 266 (02) 376-382
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Sultana S, Awai K, Nakayama Y. et al. Hypervascular hepatocellular carcinomas: bolus tracking with a 40-detector CT scanner to time arterial phase imaging. Radiology 2007; 243 (01) 140-147
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Ikram NS, Yee J, Weinstein S. et al. Multiple arterial phase MRI of arterial hypervascular hepatic lesions: improved arterial phase capture and lesion enhancement. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2017; 42 (03) 870-876
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Vernuccio F, Marin D. CT material identification. In: Samei E, Pelc N. eds. Computed Tomography. Cham: Springer; 2020: 305-318
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Heye T, Nelson RC, Ho LM, Marin D, Boll DT. Dual-energy CT applications in the abdomen. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012; 199 (5, Suppl): S64-S70
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Lee SH, Lee JM, Kim KW. et al. Dual-energy computed tomography to assess tumor response to hepatic radiofrequency ablation: potential diagnostic value of virtual noncontrast images and iodine maps. Invest Radiol 2011; 46 (02) 77-84
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Gu J, Liu S, Du S. et al. Diagnostic value of MRI-PDFF for hepatic steatosis in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2019; 29 (07) 3564-3573
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Venkatesh SK, Yin M, Ehman RL. Magnetic resonance elastography of liver: technique, analysis, and clinical applications. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013; 37 (03) 544-555
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Frydrychowicz A. Review of hepatobiliary contrast agents: current applications and challenges. Clin Liver Dis (Hoboken) 2018; 11 (01) 22-26
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Hyodo T, Murakami T, Imai Y. et al. Hypovascular nodules in patients with chronic liver disease: risk factors for development of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiology 2013; 266 (02) 480-490
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ahn SS, Kim MJ, Lim JS, Hong HS, Chung YE, Choi JY. Added value of gadoxetic acid-enhanced hepatobiliary phase MR imaging in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiology 2010; 255 (02) 459-466
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Guglielmo FF, Venkatesh SK, Mitchell DG. Liver MR elastography technique and image interpretation: pearls and pitfalls. Radiographics 2019; 39 (07) 1983-2002
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Kleiner DE, Brunt EM, Van Natta M. et al; Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis Clinical Research Network. Design and validation of a histological scoring system for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology 2005; 41 (06) 1313-1321
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Wood JC, Enriquez C, Ghugre N. et al. MRI R2 and R2* mapping accurately estimates hepatic iron concentration in transfusion-dependent thalassemia and sickle cell disease patients. Blood 2005; 106 (04) 1460-1465
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar