Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Detection of colorectal liver metastases: prospective comparison of unenhanced and ferumoxides-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 T, dual-phase spiral CT, and spiral CT during arterial portography

  • Published:
Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of unenhanced and ferumoxides-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging with that of dual-phase spiral CT and spiral CT during arterial portography (CTAP) for the detection of colorectal liver metastases. Fourteen patients with liver metastases candidates for partial hepatectomy were examined with dual-phase spiral CT, unenhanced and ferumoxides-enhanced MR imaging at 1.5 T, and spiral CTAP. Imaging tests were read blinded, prospectively, quantitating number of lesions excepting CTAP which used US to exclude cysts. Subsequent intraoperative US and pathologic findings were correlated with preoperative imaging results. At surgery, 36 lesions 0.5–13 cm in diameter (mean ±standard deviation, 2.9±2.1 cm) were identified. Dual-phase spiral CT depicted 21/36 (58%); precontrast MR imaging, 19/36 (53%); ferumoxides-enhanced MR imaging, 30/36 (83%); and spiral CTAP, 34/36 (94%) lesions. Ferumoxides-enhanced MR imaging was significantly more sensitive than spiral CT and unenhanced MR imaging (P<0.01). The difference in sensitivity between ferumoxides-enhanced MR imaging and spiral CTAP was not statistically significant (P>0.1). Spiral CTAP, however, depicted nine false-positive lesions (2 hemangiomas, 7 perfusion defects). The positive predictive value was 79% for spiral CTAP and 100% for combined pre- and postcontrast MR imaging. We conclude that ferumoxides-enhanced MR imaging is superior to unenhanced MR imaging and biphasic spiral CT for depiction of colorectal liver metastases. Further investigation is needed to clarify whether MR imaging with use of ferumoxides might replace spiral CTAP for preoperative evaluation of liver resection candidates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Registry of Hepatic Metastases. Resection of the liver for colorectal carcinoma metastases: a multi-institutional study of indications for resection. Surgery 1988;103:278–288.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Steele G Jr, Ravikumar TS. Resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: biological perspectives. Ann Surg 1989;210:127–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Scheele J, Stang R, Altendorf-Hofmann A, Paul M. Resection of colorectal liver metastases. World J Surg 1995;19:59–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sugarbaker PH. Surgical decision-making for large bowel cancer metastatic to the liver. Radiology 1990;174:621–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Nelson RC, Chezmar JL, Sugarbaker PH, Bernardino ME. Hepatic tumors: comparison of CT during arterial portography, delayed CT, and MR imaging for preoperative evaluation. Radiology 1989;172:2734.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Heiken JP, Weyman PJ, Lee JKT, et al Detection of focal hepatic masses: prospective evaluation with CT, delayed CT, CT during arterial portography, and MR imaging. Radiology 1989;171:47–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Soyer P, Levesque M, Elias D, Zeitoun G, Roche A. Detection of liver metastases from colorectal cancer: comparison of intraoperative ultrasound and CTAP. Radiology 1992;183:531–44.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Soyer P, Levesque M, Caudron C, Elias D, Zeitoun G, Roche A. MRI of liver metastases from colorectal cancer vs CT during arterial portography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993;17:67–74.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Peterson MS, Baron RL, Dodd GD III, et al. Hepatic parenchymal perfusion defects detected with CTAP: imaging-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1992;185:149–55.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Soyer P, Bluemke DA, Hruban RH, Sitzmann JV, Fishman EK. Hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: detection and false-positive findings with helical CT during arterial portography. Radiology 1994;193:71–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Van Beers BE, Gallez B, Pringot J. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the liver. Radiology 1997;203:297–306.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Marchal G, Van Hecke P, Demaerel P, et al. Detection of liver metastases with superparamagnetic iron oxide in 15 patients: results of MR imaging at 1.5 T. Am J Roentgenol 1989;152:771–5.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Denys A, Arrive L, Servois V, et al. Hepatic tumors: detection and characterization at 1-T MR imaging enhanced with AMI-25. Radiology 1994;193:665–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bellin MF, Souhil Z, Auberton E, et al. Liver metastases: safety and efficacy of detection with superparamagnetic iron oxide in MR imaging. Radiology 1994;193:657–63.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Hagspiel KD, Niedl KFW, Eichenberger AC, Weder W, Marincek B. Detection of liver metastases: comparison of superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced and unenhanced MR imaging at 1.5 T with dynamic CT, intraoperative US, and percutaneous US. Radiology 1995;196:471–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Seneterre E, Taourel P, Bouvier Y et al. Detection of hepatic metastases: ferumoxides-enhanced MR imaging versus unenhanced MR imaging and CT during arterial portography. Radiology 1996;200:785–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Soyer P. Will ferumoxides-enhanced MR imaging replace CT during arterial portography in the detection of hepatic metastases? Prologue to a promising future. Radiology 1996;200:610–1.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Soyer P, Bluemke DA, Fishman EK. CT during arterial portography for the preoperative evaluation of liver tumors: how, when, and why. Am J Roentgenol 1994;163:1325–31.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Low RN, Francis IR, Sigeti IS, Foo TKF. Abdominal MR imaging: comparison of T2-weighted fast and conventional spin echo, and contrast-enhanced fast multiplanar spoiled gradient recalled imaging. Radiology 1993;186:803–11.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Semelka RC, Shoenut JP, Ascher SM, et al. Solitary hepatic metastasis: comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced CT and MR imaging with fat-suppressed T2-weighted, breath hold Tl-weighted FLASH, and dynamic gadolinium-enhanced FLASH sequences. J Magn Reson 1994;4:319–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hamm B, Mahfouz AK, Taupitz M, et al. Liver metastases: improved detection with dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging? Radiology 1997;202:677–82.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Lupetin AR, Cammisa BA, Beckman I, et al. Spiral CT during arterial portography. Radiographics 1996;16:723–43.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Department of Oncology, University of Pisa, Via Roma 67, I-56125, Pisa, Italy

    Riccardo Lencioni, Francescamaria Donati, Dania Cioni, Alessandro Paolicchi, Antonio Cicorelli & Carlo Bartolozzi

Authors
  1. Riccardo Lencioni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francescamaria Donati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dania Cioni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alessandro Paolicchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Antonio Cicorelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Carlo Bartolozzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Riccardo Lencioni.

Additional information

Recipient of a Cum Laude award for a scientific exhibit at the 1997 ESMRMB annual meeting.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lencioni, R., Donati, F., Cioni, D. et al. Detection of colorectal liver metastases: prospective comparison of unenhanced and ferumoxides-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 T, dual-phase spiral CT, and spiral CT during arterial portography. MAGMA 7, 76–87 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02592232

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02592232

Keywords

Search

Navigation