Help with my ultrasound result

[ThomasTu]

@Civilke

I am 42 years old. I have been diagnosed with Chronic HBV 20 years ago, and have been proactively monitoring the condition with blood tests and Ultrasound. Most of the time the results were good and virus load undetected. About 3 years ago, the virus load started to fluctuate between 400-2000, and my doctor decided to use Entecavir. The medicine works quite well on me, my virus load becomes undetected in 3 months after taking it.

About 6 months ago, in a routine ultrasound test, a 6mmx6mmx4mmm lesion was discovered, and I followed up with AFP and CT scan. The AFP value was 2, within the normal range; and the CT scan couldn’t find that lesion as it was too small. 3 months later, I did another Ultrasound test to monitor the lesion. I got the results yesterday. The result is as below:

"Stable appearance of the very subtle ovoid, heterogenous and slightly hyperechoic lesion within segment 3. It measures 6x7x4mm. No internal vascularity was appreciated. Further assessment is difficult due to adjacent cardiac motion. "

The conclusion is that the lesion is indeterminate. so basically in 3 months time, it grew by 1mm. I will go back to see my specialist next week. I am a bit worried, as I do feel some discomfort under the rib, although I have had this feeling for many years now. I hope this is a benign lesion, but the lesion is heterogenous, making me worried. “No internal vascularity”, is this a good thing? Can someone help to interpret the result? Since CT couldn’t detect this lesion, should I ask to get a MRI?

Hi @Civilke,

I will let one of the @HealthExperts interpret your results, as I am not a medical professional. I might say that the majority of liver nodules that are found by US are benign and most people who have them would never know unless they were scanned (this is discussed in a similar thread here: Discovery of a liver nodule).

Also, I would not be too concerned with the difference in size between the two measurements. The difference of 1mm could be due to differences in the radiographer measuring the nodule, particularly since they mention that it is very subtle.

Hope this helps,
Thomas