• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Using receiver operating characteristic curves to evaluate the diagnostic value of the combination of multislice spiral CT and alpha-fetoprotein levels for small hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients

    2017-06-19 17:22:12

    Harbin, China

    Using receiver operating characteristic curves to evaluate the diagnostic value of the combination of multislice spiral CT and alpha-fetoprotein levels for small hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients

    Guang-Sheng Jia, Guang-Long Feng, Jin-Ping Li, Hai-Long Xu, Hui Wang, Yi-Peng Cheng, Lin-Lin Yan and Hui-Jie Jiang

    Harbin, China

    BACKGROUND: The various combination of multiphase enhancement multislice spiral CT (MSCT) makes the diagnosis of a small hepatocellular carcinoma (sHCC) on the background of liver cirrhosis possible. This study was to explore whether the combination of MSCT enhancement scan and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) level could increase the diagnostic efif ciency for sHCC.

    METHODS: This study included 35 sHCC patients and 52 cirrhotic patients without image evidence of HCC as a control group. The diagnoses were made by three radiologists employing a 5-point rating scale, with postoperative pathologic results as the gold standard. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic value of the three MSCT combination modes (arterial phase+portal-venous phase, arterial phase+delayed phase, arterial phase+portal-venous phase+delayed phase) and AFP levels for sHCC on the background of liver cirrhosis.

    RESULTS: The area under ROC curve (AUC), sensitivity, and speci ficity of the combination of arterial phase+portalvenous phase+delayed phase were 0.93, 93%, and 82%, respectively. The average AUC of the arterial phase+portalvenous phase+delayed phase combination was signi ficantly greater than that of the arterial phase+portal-venous phase(AUC=0.84,P=0.01) and arterial phase+delayed phase (AUC=0.85,P=0.03). Arterial phase+portal-venous phase had a smaller AUC (0.84) than arterial phase+delayed phase (0.85), but the difference was insigni ficant (P=0.15). After combining MSCT enhancement scan with AFP, the AUC, sensitivity, and speci ficity were 0.95, 94%, and 83%, respectively, indicating a greatly increased diagnostic ef ficiency for sHCC.

    CONCLUSIONS: The combination of AFP and 3 phases MSCT enhancement scan could increase the diagnostic ef ficiency for sHCC on the background of liver cirrhosis. The application of ROC curve analysis has provided a new method and reference in HCC diagnosis.

    (Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 2017;16:303-309)

    hepatocellular carcinoma; receiver operating characteristic; multi-slice spiral CT; alpha-fetoprotein; delayed phase imaging

    Introduction

    Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most common cancer worldwide and has shown an increasing incidence in recent years.[1]Liver cirrhotic patients have a far higher risk of HCC than other populations.[2]Small hepatocellular carcinoma (sHCC) refers to HCC measuring less than 3 cm for 1 nodule or 2 nodules together.[3]Early diagnosis of HCC is crucial to improving the prognostic effect of treatments. CT scanning is the primary method for HCC detection and diagnosis, in particular multislice spiral CT (MSCT), which plays an important role in sHCC diagnosis, differentialdiagnosis, and even HCC staging.[4,5]In recent years, some researchers[6-9]have started to focus on the diagnostic value of delayed phase imaging for sHCC. Takayasu et al[8]found that delayed phase imaging could improve diagnostic sensitivity for HCC (especially sHCC). Regarding HCC detection, CT enhancement imaging in the portal-venous phase is usually less sensitive than that in the arterial phase, because the majority of the blood supply of the hepatic parenchyma is through the portal vein. There is also hepatic parenchymal enhancement in the portal-venous phase; because hepatic parenchymal enhancement and tumor enhancement usually present similar densities, tumor detection rate is significantly reduced in the portal-venous phase. However, CT enhancement imaging in the portal-venous phase helps detect hypovascular liver tumors, such as liver metastasis from colorectal cancer, since hepatic parenchyma obtains the maximal level of enhancement in the portal-venous phase, resulting in a clear difference in the CT enhancement level from non-enhancement liver metastasis. In addition, portal-venous enhancement imaging helps identify some portal-venous complications, such as tumor thrombus. sHCCs are usually highly differentiated hypovascular tumors. Compared with large HCC or latestage HCC, sHCC has less arterial blood supply and no enhancement; thus, it does not have obvious enhancement in arterial phase imaging, resulting in a lower detection rate of sHCC in arterial phase than that in latestage HCC.

    HCC patients usually have relatively elevated alphafetoprotein (AFP) levels, while cirrhotic patients have lower AFP levels.[10]Although AFP level is commonly utilized as a biomarker for sHCC screening, its validity for sHCC diagnosis is still controversial. For instance, the study conducted by Sangiovanni et al found that only 38% of sHCC patients had elevated AFP levels.[2]AFP levels depend on tumor size; late-stage HCC patients have relatively high AFP levels.[11,12]In order to further determine the diagnostic value of AFP levels for sHCC, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve[13]analysis method has been adopted by many researchers. There are currently two types of studies; the first type independently evaluates the diagnostic value for sHCC by calculating sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic accuracy, the area under ROC curve (AUC). In order to determine the value of AFP levels for diagnosis of sHCC on the background of liver cirrhosis, Sarwar et al[14]plotted the ROC curve and found that the AUC was 0.85 and the best diagnostic threshold of AFP was 20.85 ng/mL. They suggested that although the AFP method has a low sensitivity in sHCC diagnosis, it is still an effective tumor marker for sHCC screening. The second approach determines AFP’s contribution to sHCC diagnosis by comparing sHCC diagnosis indexes between AFP and other tumor markers. Jiang et al[15]performed ROC curve analysis to compare the HCC diagnosis contributions of AFP and AFP-IgM immunocomplex, and the best diagnostic thresholds were determined to be 10 μg/L and 300 AU/mL, respectively. They suggested that AFP has a certain value in sHCC diagnosis, and measuring it in combination with other tumor markers or imaging diagnostic methods would greatly improve the ability of sHCC diagnosis.

    There are so far no studies that have utilized the ROC curve approach to evaluate sHCC diagnosis efficiency by the combination of different MSCT enhancement phases and AFP levels. In this study, ROC curve analysis was used to evaluate three combinations of MSCT enhancement phases (arterial phase+portal-venous phase, arterial phase+delayed phase, arterial phase+portal-venous phase+delayed phase) through a 5-point rating scale, in combination with AFP levels, in order to evaluate the diagnostic value for sHCC in cirrhotic patients. This study aimed to provide new methods and references for evaluating the clinical value of different combinations of CT enhancement phases in HCC diagnosis.

    Methods

    General information

    The study group consisted of pathologically proved 47 sHCC in 35 patients in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University between January 2013 and December 2014. The study group consisted of 21 men and 14 women, aged 45-80 years old with an average age of 62 years. The control group consisted of 52 cirrhotic patients (patients received an ultrasound examination once every 3 months; each examination was conducted by three experienced radiologists using a double blind method for comprehensive diagnosis, and cancer nodule was never observed), including 30 men and 22 women, aged 34-85 years old with an average age of 61 years. The AFP values of all patients were recorded.

    Instruments and methods

    Lightspeed 64 Slice spiral CT (GE, USA) was used to scan all patients. The scanning range was from the diaphragmatic dome to the lower edge of the liver; the patients were in a supine position for the upper abdomen scan; the tube voltage was 120 kV; effective tube current was 200-300 mA; thread pitch was 1.375:1; and the rotate speed was 0.6-0.8 s/r. As a contrast agent, 80-100 mL of iopromide (Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Germany) was injected through the cubital vein at a flow rate of 3-3.5 mL/s. Enhancement scans of the three phases were per-formed at 20-30 seconds, 50-60 seconds, and 2-3 minutes after contrast agent injection.

    Images analysis

    All CT images were uploaded to a workstation with all identification information removed, including patient’s name, age, gender, and hospital record number. These images were evaluated blindly and independently by three experienced radiologists. In order to more accurately evaluate the diagnostic values of the arterial phase, portal-venous phase, and delayed phase for sHCC, the radiologists applied combinations of arterial phase+portal-venous phase, arterial phase+delayed phase, and arterial phase+portal-venous phase+delayed phase for separate diagnoses, and the interval between any two diagnoses was set at 2 weeks. In other words, each radiologist needed to wait for 2 weeks after each diagnosis to make a 2nd diagnosis using another combination of CT images in the same patient. In order to ensure the objectivity and repeatability of the analyses in this study, distinguishing criteria for HCC, dysplastic nodules, arterioportal shunt and focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) were developed. The criterion for HCC is nodules showing obvious homogeneous or heterogeneous enhancement and appearing hyper-dense compared to surrounding tissue in the arterial phase, iso- or hypo-dense in the portal-venous phase, and hypo-dense in the delayed phase.[16]Many well differentiated sHCCs share the similar enhancement pattern with dysplastic nodules, which is iso- or hypo-dense in the arterial and delayed phases and hypo-dense in the delayed phase.[17]These two types of nodules are generally distinguished by size: the diameter of dysplastic nodules is usually smaller than that of well differentiated sHCC, and 10 mm is the cut-off value; nodules larger than 10 mm are considered HCC, while smaller than 10 mm are considered dysplastic nodules.[18]Meanwhile, differential diagnosis needs to be performed for HCC nodules and arterioportal shunt, because these two usually present similar enhancement patterns: hyper-dense in the arterial phase, hyper- or iso-dense in the portal-venous phase, and iso-dense in the delayed phase. If a focus lesion manifests as a typical wedge shape with or without an internal linear branching structure, it is seen as an arterioportal shunt. If a lesion presents a round shape, it is presumed to be HCC;[19]however, the confidence level was set at 3 (might happen). Since FNH is a benign tumor that is usually confused with HCC, it is necessary to differentiate it from HCC. On contrastenhanced CT, FNH usually presents homogenous hyperenhancement in the arterial and portal-venous phases and iso-enhancement in the delayed phase. A common feature of FNH is its central scar which is visible on contrast-enhanced CT. Therefore, if it manifests the typical stellate scars at the central of the nodule and iso-dense in the delayed phase, the nodule is seen as an FNH. The radiologists used a 5-point rating scale for their diagnosis:“1” corresponds to a definite negative, “2” to a possible negative, “3” to a possible positive, “4” to a highly possible positive, and “5” to a definite positive diagnosis.[20]In order to calculate diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity, results equal to or greater than 3 were considered sHCC, otherwise, the diagnosis was liver cirrhosis only. In order to confirm whether measuring AFP levels helps increase the diagnostic value of MSCT enhancement scan for sHCC, the radiologists were asked to re-assess with the 5-point rating scale based on a combination of AFP levels (a study[14]showed that the best diagnostic threshold of AFP for HCC on the background of liver cirrhosis was 20.85 ng/mL; the corresponding sensitivity and specificity were 72.2% and 86.2%, respectively) and images of arterial phase+portal-venous phase+delayed phase. The 2nd review has to wait for at least 2 weeks after the 1st review. The same 5-point rating scale was used, and follow-up statistical analyses were also performed.

    Statistical analysis

    The detection rate is defined as the ratio of the total number of hyper-dense to hypo-dense foci found in a given MSCT phase. Data analysis was performed with SPSS 18.0 software. Pathological examination of the tumor tissue was employed as the gold standard. Based on the radiologists’ diagnoses and the patients’ pathological results, ROC curves were plotted for the diagnostic results (rescored based on AFP and 3-phase combination images) of MSCT images of arterial phase+portalvenous phase, arterial phase+delayed phase, and arterial phase+portal-venous phase+delayed phase, as well as 3-phase combination MSCT+AFP level. AUCs were obtained to evaluate the diagnostic value of different enhancement phase combinations for sHCC on the background of liver cirrhosis. Measurement data were analyzed through Wilcoxon signed-rank test; enumeration data were analyzed by Fisher’s exact test; andP〈0.05 was considered statistically significant. The kappa statistic was utilized to assess the consistency of diagnostic results in a pair-wise manner; a kappa value 〈0.4 suggests poor consistency, a kappa value between 0.41 and 0.75 suggests good consistency, and a kappa value >0.75 suggests high consistency.[21]

    Results

    Enhancement patterns of sHCC

    The diameter of sHCC ranged between 7 and 20 mm,with an average of 14 mm. The enhancement patterns of sHCC are shown in Table 1. Through statistical analysis of enhancement patterns, it was found that sHCC usually appeared hyper-dense compared to surrounding tissue in the arterial phase (Fig. 1A), iso- or hypo-dense in the portal-venous phase (Fig. 1B), and hypo-dense in the delayed phase (Fig. 1C). Fisher’s exact test showed significant differences between the enhancement pattern of the arterial phase and that of the portal-venous phase and the delayed phase (bothP〈0.01), as well as a significant difference between the enhancement patterns of the portal-venous phase and the delayed phase (P〈0.01). The detection rates of the arterial, portal-venous and delayed phases were 83.0%, 61.7%, and 87.2%, respectively, with a significant difference in the detection rates of the three phases (P〈0.01). Moreover, the detection rates of the arterial and delayed phases were significantly higher than that of the portal-venous phase (P〈0.05;P〈0.01), and there was no significant difference between the detection rates of the arterial phase and the delayed phase (P=0.77).

    Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of the 3 different phase combinations

    In this study, three radiologists participated in the sHCC diagnosis employing 3 phase combination modes of MSCT enhancement scan, while the kappa statistic was adopted to evaluate the diagnostic consistency between pairs of radiologists. The sHCC diagnostic results using any phase combination of MSCT enhancement scan were all highly consistent (kappa: 0.68-0.82). Arterial phase+portal-venous phase+delayed phase had the highest kappa value, and arterial phase+delayed phase had a slightly higher consistency than the combination of arterial phase+portal-venous phase (Table 2).

    In Table 3, the arterial phase+portal-venous phase+ delayed phase combination had the highest accuracy (87%), sensitivity (93%), and specificity (82%), and the average AUC was 0.93, significantly greater than that of the arterial phase+portal-venous phase (AUC=0.84,P=0.01) and arterial phase+delayed phase (AUC=0.85,P=0.03). Arterial phase+portal-venous phase had a smaller AUC (0.84) than arterial phase+delayed phase (0.85), but the difference was insignificant (P=0.15).

    In order to evaluate the overall diagnostic value of the 3 MSCT phase combinations (arterial phase+portal-venous phase, arterial phase+delayed phase, arterial phase+portal-venous phase+delayed phase) for sHCC on the background of liver cirrhosis, the three radiologists’ scores for each image set were averaged to plot ROC curves (Fig. 2), and the AUC values of arterial phase+portal-venous phase, arterial phase+delayed phase, and arterial phase+portal-venous phase+delayed phase were 0.88, 0.89, and 0.97, respectively, indicating that the 3-phase combination had the highest diagnostic accuracy, while the diagnostic accuracy of arterial phase+delayed phase was higher than that of arterial phase+portal-venous phase.

    Table 1. Enhancement pattern of 47 small hepatocellular carcinomas and detection rate

    Table 2. Kappa coefficient of three observers

    Table 3. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and AUC of different phase combinations of MSCT and the combination of three MSCT phases and AFP

    Fig. 1. A 67-year-old male patient with small focus (arrow) on the right lobe of the liver with an approximate size of 15×18 mm. A: Obvious complete enhancement in the arterial phase, hyper-density; B: Iso-density in the portal-venous phase; C: Hypo-density in the delayed phase.

    Fig. 2. Comprehensive ROC curves for 3 combinations from 3 observers (scores from 3 observers were averaged for each combination).

    Fig. 3. ROC curves from 3 observers of the combination of MSCT enhancement scan 3-phase combination mode and AFP for sHCC diagnosis.

    The combination of MSCT enhancement with AFP improves the diagnostic accuracy of sHCC

    The average AFP level of patients in the sHCC group was 165.30 ng/mL, significantly higher than that of the control group (15.40 ng/mL,P〈0.01). The radiologists re-scored based on AFP values and MSCT enhancement scan 3-phase combination images. After ROC curve analysis; the obtained AUC values were 0.94, 0.95, and 0.97 (Fig. 3), all greater than the AUC values obtained using only MSCT enhancement scan 3-phase combination. The sHCC diagnostic sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy based on both MSCT enhancement scan and AFP are shown in Table 3.

    Discussion

    Most sHCC cases have a “fast-in, fast-out” feature: in the arterial phase, tumors appear hyper-dense compared with surrounding hepatic parenchyma, which is the diagnostic basis of sHCC.[22]In the portal-venous phase, the degree of enhancement rapidly drops and the tumor appears iso- or hypo-dense. In the delayed phase, the enhancement degree keeps dropping and the tumor appears hypo-dense.[23,24]This is because most sHCC cases are hypervascular tumors; a great amount of portalvenous blood is supplied to the liver, resulting in peak values of the enhancement degree of hepatic parenchyma in the portal-venous phase. Because the hypervascular sHCC also presents a high enhancement state, the hepatic parenchyma and sHCC have similar densities, and thus some sHCC cases appear iso-dense in the portalvenous phase.[25]

    Comprehensive ROC curve analysis showed the AUC of arterial phase+portal-venous phase+delayed phase was greater than that of arterial phase+portal-venous phase, or arterial phase+delayed phase. These data indicated that the 3-phase combination for sHCC on the background of liver cirrhosis had the highest diagnostic accuracy. It was pointed out by Choi et al[26]that the diagnostic accuracy of arterial phase+portal-venous phase was not significantly different from that of the 3-phase combination, and the delayed phase had no diagnostic significance for sHCC. However, sHCC cases in Choi’ s study were all hypervascular nodules, whereas many sHCC cases in clinical practice are hypovascular. Arterial phase and portal-venous phase have poor diagnostic value for hypovascular sHCC cases, while the delayed phase plays an important role. MSCT 3-phase enhancement scan can detect the features of sHCC cases with different vascular types, and is favorable for early HCC diagnosis.[27]Combining images of arterial phase, portal-venous phase, and delayed phase not only increase diagnostic accuracy of sHCC, but also improve focal lesion detection rate.

    As a common HCC diagnostic method, MSCT multiphase enhancement scan has been frequently investigated by researchers, and selection of the best phase combination has become a research focus. Kim et al[28]compared the diagnostic values of dynamic enhancement CT 3-phase scan (arterial phase, portal-venous phase and delayed phase) and 4-phase scan (early arterial phase, arterial phase, portal-venous phase and delayed phase) for HCC, and found no significant differences in sensitivity, specificity, AUC between 3-phase scan and 4-phase scan. They concluded that 4-phase enhancement scan does not improve diagnostic accuracy for HCC. Denecke et al[23]performed MSCT plain scans and 3-phase scans (arte-rial phase, portal-venous phase and venous phase), calculated and compared the detection rates of plain scan and different phases of enhancement scan, and found all nodules were visible in the arterial or portal-venous phases, and that the detections rates of the arterial phase and the portal-venous phase were both signi ficantly higher than that of the plain scan and the venous phase.

    Table 1 showed that the detection rate of the delayed phase (87.2%) was higher than that of the portal-venous phase (61.7%), indicating that the delayed phase played an important role in improving diagnostic accuracy for sHCC. This is consistent with the research finding of Iannaccone et al,[6]who compared the sensitivities and positive predictive values of MSCT enhancement images of different phase combinations in diagnosing sHCC on the background of liver cirrhosis, they found that the delayed phase could signi ficantly increase diagnostic sensitivity, presenting a supporting effect on CT dual-phase scan for HCC diagnosis. Lim et al[29]compared AUCs of the 3-phase combination and the arterial phase+portalvenous phase combination, and reached a similar conclusion: adding delayed phase imaging into dual-phase CT scan helps describe HCC features and improves diagnostic accuracy. Although adding delayed phase imaging will increase the patient’s exposure to radiation and add extra scanning time, it can improve detection rate and diagnostic accuracy for HCC, thus offsetting the cost of radiation exposure to some extent.

    While imaging examination has many advantages, AFP is a speci fic tumor marker for HCC and has an important value in early sHCC diagnosis.[10,30]In this study, the combination of AFP and MSCT enhancement scan for sHCC diagnosis had an AUC of 0.95, higher than that of the AUC of the MSCT 3-phase combination (0.93). Through ROC curve analysis, this study further confirmed the important role of the combination of MSCT enhancement scan and AFP in improving the diagnostic accuracy for sHCC.

    Although certain signi ficant results have been obtained, there are still some shortcomings in this study. First, although all patients in this study underwent the same 64-slice spiral CT scan, there have been some changes to the technology over time; since the examinations were performed at different times, there might have been an in fluence on sHCC detection. Second, parameters such as the dose and injection rate of contrast agent, and the scanning time of each phase were not customized, but were rather set as fixed values due to the limitations of clinical practice, which could also affect the results.

    In conclusion, the combination of arterial phase+ portal-venous phase+delayed phase and AFP is the most accurate approach for the diagnosis of sHCC on the background of liver cirrhosis, with the highest AUC, sensitivity, and specificity. Compared with the combination of arterial phase+portal-venous phase, the combination of arterial phase+delayed phase had greater AUC in sHCC diagnosis, indicating that the delayed phase has an important role in sHCC diagnosis that should not be overlooked.

    Contributors:JHJ proposed the study. JGS, FGL, LJP and XHL performed the research and wrote the first draft. WH, CYP and YLL collected and analyzed the data. All authors contributed to the design and interpretation of the study and to further drafts. JHJ is the guarantor.

    Funding:This study was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81301275, 81471736 and 81671760), the National Science and Technology Pillar Program during the Twelfth Five-Year Plan Period (2015BAI01B09), and Heilongjiang Province Foundation for Returness (LC2013C38).

    Ethical approval:This study was approved by the institutional review board of Harbin Medical University.

    Competing interest:No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.

    1 Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2011;61:69-90.

    2 Sangiovanni A, Del Ninno E, Fasani P, De Fazio C, Ronchi G, Romeo R, et al. Increased survival of cirrhotic patients with a hepatocellular carcinoma detected during surveillance. Gastroenterology 2004;126:1005-1014.

    3 Hernandez-Gea V, Turon F, Berzigotti A, Villanueva A. Management of small hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: focus on portal hypertension. World J Gastroenterol 2013;19:1193-1199.

    4 Hennedige T, Venkatesh SK. Advances in computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol 2016;22:205-220.

    5 Hennedige T, Venkatesh SK. Imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: diagnosis, staging and treatment monitoring. Cancer Imaging 2013;12:530-547.

    6 Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, Rossi P, Mangiapane F, Murakami T, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma: role of unenhanced and delayed phase multi-detector row helical CT in patients with cirrhosis. Radiology 2005;234:460-467.

    7 Lin YY, Chen CM, Huang YH, Lin CY, Chu SY, Hsu MY, et al. Liver metastasis from hepatoid adenocarcinoma of the stomach mimicking hepatocellular carcinoma: Dynamic computed tomography findings. World J Gastroenterol 2015;21:13524-13531.

    8 Takayasu K, Muramatsu Y, Mizuguchi Y, Ojima H. CT Imaging of early hepatocellular carcinoma and the natural outcome of hypoattenuating nodular lesions in chronic liver disease. Oncology 2007;72:83-91.

    9 Furlan A, Marin D, Vanzulli A, Patera GP, Ronzoni A, Midiri M, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients at multi-detector CT: hepatic venous phase versus delayed phase for the detection of tumour washout. Br J Radiol 2011;84:403-412.

    10 Bertino G, Neri S, Bruno CM, Ardiri AM, Calvagno GS, Malaguarnera M, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic value of alpha-fetoprotein, des-γ-carboxy prothrombin and squamous cell carcinoma antigen immunoglobulin M complexes in hepatocellular carcinoma. Minerva Med 2011;102:363-371.

    11 Li T, Qin LX, Gong X, Zhou J, Sun HC, Qiu SJ, et al. Hepatitis B virus surface antigen-negative and hepatitis C virus antibody-negative hepatocellular carcinoma: clinical characteristics, outcome, and risk factors for early and late intrahepatic recurrence after resection. Cancer 2013;119:126-135.

    12 Tandon P, Garcia-Tsao G. Prognostic indicators in hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review of 72 studies. Liver Int 2009;29:502-510.

    13 Hajian-Tilaki K. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for medical diagnostic test evaluation. Caspian J Intern Med 2013;4:627-635.

    14 Sarwar S, Khan AA, Tarique S. Validity of alpha fetoprotein for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2014;24:18-22.

    15 Jiang J, Wu C, Shen Y, Xu B, Zheng X, Li X, et al. Clinical application of determining serum AFP-IgM complexes for diagnosis of small hepatocellular carcinoma. Anticancer Res 2011;31:687-691.

    16 Tang A, Cruite I, Sirlin CB. Toward a standardized system for hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis using computed tomography and MRI. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013;7:269-279.

    17 Choi BI, Han JK, Hong SH, Kim TK, Song CS, Kim KW, et al. Dysplastic nodules of the liver: imaging findings. Abdom Imaging 1999;24:250-257.

    18 Jang HJ, Lim JH, Lee SJ, Park CK, Park HS, Do YS. Hepatocellular carcinoma: are combined CT during arterial portography and CT hepatic arteriography in addition to triple-phase helical CT all necessary for preoperative evaluation? Radiology 2000;215:373-380.

    19 Wei XB, Xu J, Li N, Yu Y, Shi J, Guo WX, et al. The role of three-dimensional imaging in optimizing diagnosis, classification and surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein tumor thrombus. HPB (Oxford) 2016;18:287-295.

    20 Sofue K, Tsurusaki M, Kawasaki R, Fujii M, Sugimura K. Evaluation of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic liver: comparison of different concentrations of contrast material with multi-detector row helical CT--a prospective randomized study. Eur J Radiol 2011;80:e237-242.

    21 McHugh ML. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2012;22:276-282.

    22 Marrero JA, Hussain HK, Nghiem HV, Umar R, Fontana RJ, Lok AS. Improving the prediction of hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients with an arterially-enhancing liver mass. Liver Transpl 2005;11:281-289.

    23 Denecke T, Grieser C, Fr?ling V, Steffen IG, Rudolph B, Stelter L, et al. Multislice computed tomography using a triple-phase contrast protocol for preoperative assessment of hepatic tumor load in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma before liver transplantation. Transpl Int 2009;22:395-402.

    24 Haberman D, Mela M, Martínez A, Mancinelli A, Laguens R, Gruz F, et al. Accuracy of multislice computed tomography in the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis evaluated for liver transplantation. Acta Gastroenterol Latinoam 2011;41:190-198.

    25 Cartier V, Aubé C. Diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. Diagn Interv Imaging 2014;95:709-719.

    26 Choi BI, Lee HJ, Han JK, Choi DS, Seo JB, Han MC. Detection of hypervascular nodular hepatocellular carcinomas: value of triphasic helical CT compared with iodized-oil CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;168:219-224.

    27 Koh TS, Thng CH, Hartono S, Lee PS, Choo SP, Poon DY, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced CT imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: feasibility of a prolonged dual-phase imaging protocol with tracer kinetics modeling. Eur Radiol 2009;19:1184-1196.

    28 Kim SK, Lim JH, Lee WJ, Kim SH, Choi D, Lee SJ, et al. Detection of hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of dynamic three-phase computed tomography images and four-phase computed tomography images using multidetector row helical computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2002;26:691-698.

    29 Lim JH, Choi D, Kim SH, Lee SJ, Lee WJ, Lim HK, et al. Detection of hepatocellular carcinoma: value of adding delayed phase imaging to dual-phase helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:67-73.

    30 Asrih M, Lenglet S, Mach F, Montecucco F. Alpha-fetoprotein: a controversial prognostic biomarker for small hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol 2013;19:328-330.

    April 17, 2016

    Accepted after revision December 7, 2016

    Author Affiliations: Department of Radiology, Second Affiliated Hospital, Harbin Medical University, Harbin 150086, China (Jia GS, Feng GL, Li JP, Xu HL, Wang H, Cheng YP, Yan LL and Jiang HJ)

    Hui-Jie Jiang, MD, PhD, Department of Radiology, Second Affiliated Hospital, Harbin Medical University, Harbin 150086, China (Tel: +86-451-86605576; Email: jhjemail@163.com)

    ? 2017, Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. All rights reserved.

    10.1016/S1499-3872(17)60018-3

    Published online May 18, 2017.

    国产亚洲精品一区二区www| 超碰成人久久| 国产精华一区二区三区| 99热只有精品国产| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 午夜日韩欧美国产| √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 高清毛片免费观看视频网站| 久久久久久久精品吃奶| 久久香蕉国产精品| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 亚洲国产欧美网| 成熟少妇高潮喷水视频| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 美女大奶头视频| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影 | 9色porny在线观看| 性欧美人与动物交配| 操美女的视频在线观看| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 久久精品亚洲精品国产色婷小说| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 精品国产美女av久久久久小说| 国产精品亚洲一级av第二区| 久久久久久久久中文| 日本在线视频免费播放| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 国产高清有码在线观看视频 | 久久中文字幕人妻熟女| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 每晚都被弄得嗷嗷叫到高潮| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 久久人妻av系列| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 亚洲成人国产一区在线观看| 久久人人精品亚洲av| 精品人妻1区二区| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清 | 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 我的亚洲天堂| 午夜老司机福利片| 成人手机av| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 啦啦啦 在线观看视频| 久久中文看片网| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 久久国产精品影院| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 国产成人一区二区三区免费视频网站| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 亚洲av美国av| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 精品人妻1区二区| 亚洲精品国产区一区二| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区mp4| 免费无遮挡裸体视频| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 黑人操中国人逼视频| 国内精品久久久久精免费| 日本在线视频免费播放| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 国产av又大| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 色综合站精品国产| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕| 国产精品av久久久久免费| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 一进一出好大好爽视频| 午夜福利18| 亚洲成人久久性| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 精品高清国产在线一区| xxx96com| 国产高清videossex| 色av中文字幕| 女人被狂操c到高潮| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| a在线观看视频网站| а√天堂www在线а√下载| or卡值多少钱| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 亚洲 欧美一区二区三区| 最近最新中文字幕大全电影3 | 性欧美人与动物交配| 黄色视频不卡| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 丁香欧美五月| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看 | 久久香蕉国产精品| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 亚洲情色 制服丝袜| 久久精品91无色码中文字幕| 人成视频在线观看免费观看| 久久中文字幕一级| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| av超薄肉色丝袜交足视频| 香蕉丝袜av| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 男女之事视频高清在线观看| 久久精品91无色码中文字幕| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 天天添夜夜摸| 精品国产美女av久久久久小说| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 久久婷婷人人爽人人干人人爱 | 亚洲av熟女| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 琪琪午夜伦伦电影理论片6080| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区 | 韩国av一区二区三区四区| 丁香六月欧美| 日韩国内少妇激情av| 我的亚洲天堂| 亚洲精品国产色婷婷电影| 久久草成人影院| 成人国语在线视频| 国产麻豆69| www.熟女人妻精品国产| 欧美大码av| 9191精品国产免费久久| 757午夜福利合集在线观看| 国产精品久久视频播放| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放 | 丝袜美足系列| 亚洲自偷自拍图片 自拍| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看 | 欧美国产日韩亚洲一区| 欧美绝顶高潮抽搐喷水| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 国产午夜精品久久久久久| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 精品久久久久久久久久免费视频| 黑人操中国人逼视频| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 亚洲熟女毛片儿| 久久久久久人人人人人| 亚洲美女黄片视频| 国产不卡一卡二| 长腿黑丝高跟| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 久久影院123| 亚洲午夜理论影院| 午夜激情av网站| 久久久久亚洲av毛片大全| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 在线观看午夜福利视频| 一本久久中文字幕| 久99久视频精品免费| 国内精品久久久久久久电影| 亚洲第一欧美日韩一区二区三区| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 日韩欧美在线二视频| 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 韩国av一区二区三区四区| 亚洲国产精品合色在线| 一二三四在线观看免费中文在| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| 老司机靠b影院| 黄色 视频免费看| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡 | 欧美日韩乱码在线| 69av精品久久久久久| 亚洲精品久久国产高清桃花| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区 | 999久久久国产精品视频| 在线视频色国产色| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 91国产中文字幕| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 亚洲男人的天堂狠狠| 脱女人内裤的视频| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 国产亚洲av高清不卡| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 丁香欧美五月| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 亚洲第一青青草原| 女性生殖器流出的白浆| 一级片免费观看大全| 久久香蕉激情| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 制服人妻中文乱码| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 99香蕉大伊视频| av片东京热男人的天堂| 一级毛片高清免费大全| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线| 欧美午夜高清在线| 色综合站精品国产| 这个男人来自地球电影免费观看| 女警被强在线播放| av天堂久久9| 久久精品亚洲精品国产色婷小说| 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区| 老熟妇仑乱视频hdxx| 丁香欧美五月| 国产精品二区激情视频| 少妇裸体淫交视频免费看高清 | 伦理电影免费视频| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 久热这里只有精品99| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人| 国产av又大| 99久久综合精品五月天人人| 久久人妻av系列| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 在线观看www视频免费| 在线视频色国产色| 日韩免费av在线播放| av天堂在线播放| 亚洲成人国产一区在线观看| 亚洲黑人精品在线| www.精华液| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 岛国在线观看网站| 亚洲 国产 在线| 精品国产美女av久久久久小说| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 国产精华一区二区三区| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 丝袜美足系列| 一边摸一边做爽爽视频免费| 国产不卡一卡二| 视频区欧美日本亚洲| 久9热在线精品视频| 91大片在线观看| 国语自产精品视频在线第100页| 欧美日本亚洲视频在线播放| 19禁男女啪啪无遮挡网站| 两性夫妻黄色片| 日本在线视频免费播放| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 不卡一级毛片| 欧美午夜高清在线| av网站免费在线观看视频| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 自线自在国产av| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 变态另类丝袜制服| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看| 国产成人av激情在线播放| 97碰自拍视频| 久久婷婷人人爽人人干人人爱 | 91麻豆av在线| 麻豆一二三区av精品| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 欧美黑人精品巨大| av在线天堂中文字幕| 精品熟女少妇八av免费久了| 成人18禁在线播放| 欧美精品啪啪一区二区三区| 日韩精品青青久久久久久| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 黄频高清免费视频| 国产成人欧美在线观看| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频 | 啪啪无遮挡十八禁网站| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 亚洲最大成人中文| avwww免费| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 国产麻豆69| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影 | 国产精华一区二区三区| 国产精品永久免费网站| 超碰成人久久| 国产av在哪里看| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 国产av又大| 亚洲在线自拍视频| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 人成视频在线观看免费观看| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类 | 一夜夜www| 性欧美人与动物交配| 亚洲一区二区三区不卡视频| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看 | 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色 | 操美女的视频在线观看| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 亚洲中文字幕一区二区三区有码在线看 | 看黄色毛片网站| 亚洲成人久久性| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| 麻豆av在线久日| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| or卡值多少钱| 很黄的视频免费| 欧美日本视频| 免费看a级黄色片| 最近最新中文字幕大全免费视频| 成熟少妇高潮喷水视频| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 亚洲电影在线观看av| av视频免费观看在线观看| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 久久影院123| 嫩草影视91久久| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 久久 成人 亚洲| 精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 欧美色视频一区免费| 亚洲国产欧美网| 亚洲片人在线观看| 欧美日韩一级在线毛片| 久久 成人 亚洲| 自线自在国产av| 国产亚洲欧美在线一区二区| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 欧美一级毛片孕妇| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 久久精品影院6| 欧美色视频一区免费| 一级毛片高清免费大全| 久久精品亚洲精品国产色婷小说| 9热在线视频观看99| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 99久久综合精品五月天人人| 老司机在亚洲福利影院| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 国产精品影院久久| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 中文字幕色久视频| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 日本 欧美在线| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 一区二区三区激情视频| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| 午夜精品在线福利| 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 国产亚洲欧美98| 十分钟在线观看高清视频www| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 中文字幕人成人乱码亚洲影| 久久久久久久精品吃奶| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 长腿黑丝高跟| 午夜老司机福利片| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 在线观看日韩欧美| 香蕉久久夜色| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 中文字幕人妻熟女乱码| 中文字幕久久专区| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 搡老岳熟女国产| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 国产亚洲精品第一综合不卡| 黄频高清免费视频| 午夜久久久久精精品| 午夜福利高清视频| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 老熟妇仑乱视频hdxx| 国产av精品麻豆| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 999久久久精品免费观看国产| 黄色视频不卡| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 精品福利观看| 国产三级黄色录像| 性少妇av在线| 国语自产精品视频在线第100页| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 国产精品亚洲一级av第二区| 两个人免费观看高清视频| 制服诱惑二区| 国产熟女xx| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影 | 国产精品九九99| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类 | 美女 人体艺术 gogo| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 在线免费观看的www视频| 国内精品久久久久久久电影| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| 日本vs欧美在线观看视频| 国产免费男女视频| 黄色女人牲交| 热99re8久久精品国产| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| xxx96com| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 69精品国产乱码久久久| 国产精品国产高清国产av| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 在线播放国产精品三级| 久久人人精品亚洲av| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 日韩大尺度精品在线看网址 | 黄片大片在线免费观看| netflix在线观看网站| 国产主播在线观看一区二区| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 精品国产一区二区久久| 亚洲午夜精品一区,二区,三区| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区 | 一进一出抽搐动态| 亚洲色图综合在线观看| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 如日韩欧美国产精品一区二区三区| 亚洲av片天天在线观看| 久久婷婷人人爽人人干人人爱 | 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区mp4| or卡值多少钱| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 亚洲 国产 在线| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看| 国产1区2区3区精品| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 高清在线国产一区| 最好的美女福利视频网| 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 欧美性长视频在线观看| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 老司机午夜福利在线观看视频| 国产一区二区三区视频了| а√天堂www在线а√下载| 久久青草综合色| 午夜a级毛片| 美女 人体艺术 gogo| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 极品教师在线免费播放| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美| 天天添夜夜摸| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 久久国产乱子伦精品免费另类| 给我免费播放毛片高清在线观看| 两性午夜刺激爽爽歪歪视频在线观看 | 天天添夜夜摸| 黄片播放在线免费| av在线播放免费不卡| 国产麻豆69| 国产99白浆流出| 一级片免费观看大全| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 国产高清视频在线播放一区| 一级片免费观看大全| 在线观看舔阴道视频| 国产一区二区激情短视频| av天堂久久9| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 热99re8久久精品国产| 成人特级黄色片久久久久久久| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 精品国产乱码久久久久久男人| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 在线天堂中文资源库| 91大片在线观看| 免费少妇av软件| 成人国语在线视频| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| 久久久久九九精品影院| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看 | 91在线观看av| 黄色视频不卡| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| 午夜福利18| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 亚洲全国av大片| 午夜精品久久久久久毛片777| 亚洲三区欧美一区| 国产精品久久视频播放| 色老头精品视频在线观看| 午夜亚洲福利在线播放| 亚洲国产欧美网| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 免费高清视频大片| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 丰满的人妻完整版| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 亚洲国产看品久久| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 久久国产乱子伦精品免费另类| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 久99久视频精品免费| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 欧美乱妇无乱码| 18禁美女被吸乳视频| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 黄色视频不卡| 日日夜夜操网爽| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 久久精品影院6| 免费观看精品视频网站| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频| 十八禁网站免费在线| 国内精品久久久久精免费| 亚洲视频免费观看视频| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 色综合亚洲欧美另类图片| www.熟女人妻精品国产| 精品国产美女av久久久久小说| 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 九色国产91popny在线| 亚洲久久久国产精品| 日韩大尺度精品在线看网址 | 亚洲精品国产色婷婷电影| 免费av毛片视频| 久久影院123| 亚洲久久久国产精品| 看免费av毛片| 国产一区二区在线av高清观看| 精品高清国产在线一区| 日韩视频一区二区在线观看| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一出视频| 国产成人精品无人区| 亚洲午夜精品一区,二区,三区| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 精品国产亚洲在线| 日韩有码中文字幕| 亚洲国产精品sss在线观看| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区| 热re99久久国产66热| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 亚洲色图av天堂| 又大又爽又粗| 激情视频va一区二区三区| 亚洲色图 男人天堂 中文字幕| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费 | 成人18禁在线播放| 免费在线观看完整版高清| 久久久久久久久免费视频了|