Von Meyenburg complexes of the liver: imaging findings.
OBJECTIVE
Our purpose was to present imaging findings of six cases proven or supposed to be von Meyenburg complexes (VMCs) with a basis of reviewing the pathologic literature and to describe imaging points for the diagnosis of typical VMC along with its differential diagnosis.


METHODS
Six cases were diagnosed as VMC of the liver with imaging modalities (one had histopathologic proof). Both ultrasound (US) and CT were available for all cases, and MRI was used for three cases. Follow-up with US, CT and/or MRI was performed in five cases.


RESULTS
US detected varying abnormalities of the livers in four cases. CT and MRI revealed multiple or numerous intrahepatic tiny (usually < 5 mm) cystoid lesions in all of the cases. The lesions were scattered throughout the livers, and some of them were located more frequently adjacent to the medium-sized portal veins than to the hepatic veins of similar size on CT. Moreover, some lesions were apparently located in the subcapsular areas (up to the hepatic capsules). They were usually irregular in shape and showed no enhancement but increased in number by approximately 80-150% after administration of intravenous contrast medium. The T2-weighted MR images and MR cholangiopancreatography showed the lesions to be much more apparent and to be more numerous than T1-weighted images did. Follow-up of five cases with imaging modalities did not show remarkable change of the lesions.


CONCLUSIONS
Despite our limited experience, VMC lesions seem to show some CT and MR features different from those of other multiple small hepatic lesions. They presented as multiple or numerous intrahepatic tiny cystoid lesions usually with irregular contour, scattered throughout the liver up to the subcapsular areas, and were detected in far greater number by enhanced CT or T2-weighted MR images than by unenhanced CT or T1-weighted images. They showed no remarkable change on long term follow-up imaging. We propose that a diagnosis of typical VMC could be made after analyzing CT or MR images carefully with good understanding of its pathologic basis, but imaging follow-up is necessary in oncology patients.
Luo
T Y
TY
Department of Radiology, Clinical Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Japan.
Itai
Y
Y
Eguchi
N
N
Kurosaki
Y
Y
Onaya
H
H
Ahmadi
Y
Y
Niitsu
M
M
Tsunoda
H S
HS
D000368:Aged; D001652:Bile Ducts / Q000473:pathology; D003287:Contrast Media / Q000008:administration & dosage; D003560:Cysts / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology; D003937:Diagnosis, Differential; D003952:Diagnostic Imaging; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006222:Hamartoma / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology; D006503:Hepatic Veins / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology; D006801:Humans; D007089:Image Enhancement; D007275:Injections, Intravenous; D008107:Liver Diseases / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010179:Pancreas / Q000473:pathology; D011169:Portal Vein / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology; D011856:Radiographic Image Enhancement; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed; D014463:Ultrasonography
D003287:Contrast Media