Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of gadoxetic acid on image quality of arterial multiphase magnetic resonance imaging of liver: comparison study with gadoteric acid-enhanced MRI

  • Hepatobiliary
  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the effects of gadoxetic acid and gadoteric acid on the image quality of single-breath-hold, triple (first, second, and third) arterial hepatic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Methods

Two hundred and eleven patients were divided into two groups according to the contrast materials used (gadoxetic acid, 108 patients and gadoteric acid, 103 patients). All 3.0-T MR examinations included triple arterial phase acquisition using the 4D enhanced T1-weighted high-resolution isotropic volume examination (eTHRIVE) keyhole technique. The image qualities of the pre-contrast and triple arterial phases were assessed in terms of image artifacts, sharpness of the intrahepatic vessel and liver edge, and overall image quality with a 5-point scale for qualitative analysis.

Results

The image quality of gadoxetic acid-enhanced liver MRI in the triple arterial phases was significantly degraded compared with that of gadoteric acid-enhanced liver MRI, although better image scores were observed in the pre-contrast images in the gadoxetic acid group (P < 0.001). The overall image quality gradually improved from the first to the third arterial phases in both groups (P < 0.003).

Conclusions

Intravenous gadoxetic acid could have a detrimental effect on image quality of triple arterial phase MRI with the 4D eTHRIVE Keyhole technique. The third arterial phase images had the best image qualities; thus, they could be used as key scans.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yoshioka H, Takahashi N, Yamaguchi M, Lou D, Saida Y, Itai Y (2002) Double arterial phase dynamic MRI with sensitivity encoding (SENSE) for hypervascular hepatocellular carcinomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 16:259-266. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.10146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Taouli B, Martin AJ, Qayyum A, Merriman RB, Vigneron D, Yeh BM, Coakley FV (2004) Parallel imaging and diffusion tensor imaging for diffusion-weighted MRI of the liver: preliminary experience in healthy volunteers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:677-680. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.183.3.1830677

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ito K, Fujita T, Shimizu A, Koike S, Sasaki K, Matsunaga N, Hibino S, Yuhara M (2004) Multiarterial phase dynamic MRI of small early enhancing hepatic lesions in cirrhosis or chronic hepatitis: differentiating between hypervascular hepatocellular carcinomas and pseudolesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:699-705. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.183.3.1830699

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Beck GM, De Becker J, Jones AC, von Falkenhausen M, Willinek WA, Gieseke J (2008) Contrast-enhanced timing robust acquisition order with a preparation of the longitudinal signal component (CENTRA plus) for 3D contrast-enhanced abdominal imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 27:1461-1467. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kanematsu M, Goshima S, Kondo H, Yokoyama R, Kajita K, Hoshi H, Onozuka M, Nozaki A, Hirano M, Shiratori Y, Moriyama N (2006) Double hepatic arterial phase MRI of the liver with switching of reversed centric and centric K-space reordering. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:464-472. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.05.0522

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Low RN, Bayram E, Panchal NJ, Estkowski L (2010) High-resolution double arterial phase hepatic MRI using adaptive 2D centric view ordering: initial clinical experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:947-956. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.2507

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. McKenzie CA, Lim D, Ransil BJ, Morrin M, Pedrosa I, Yeh EN, Sodickson DK, Rofsky NM (2004) Shortening MR image acquisition time for volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination with a recently developed parallel imaging reconstruction technique: clinical feasibility. Radiology 230:589-594. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2302021230

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rofsky NM, Lee VS, Laub G, Pollack MA, Krinsky GA, Thomasson D, Ambrosino MM, Weinreb JC (1999) Abdominal MR imaging with a volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination. Radiology 212:876-884. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.212.3.r99se34876

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hong HS, Kim HS, Kim MJ, De Becker J, Mitchell DG, Kanematsu M (2008) Single breath-hold multiarterial dynamic MRI of the liver at 3T using a 3D fat-suppressed keyhole technique. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:396-402. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21442

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tanimoto A, Lee JM, Murakami T, Huppertz A, Kudo M, Grazioli L (2009) Consensus report of the 2nd International Forum for Liver MRI. Eur Radiol 19 Suppl 5:S975-S989. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1624-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Davenport MS, Viglianti BL, Al-Hawary MM, Caoili EM, Kaza RK, Liu PS, Maturen KE, Chenevert TL, Hussain HK (2013) Comparison of acute transient dyspnea after intravenous administration of gadoxetate disodium and gadobenate dimeglumine: effect on arterial phase image quality. Radiology 266:452-461. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12120826

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bayer Inc. (2017) PRIMOVIST product Monograph: part III Consumer information. http://www.bayer.ca/omr/online/primovist-pm-pt3-en.pdf. Accessed on March 28 2019.

  13. Haradome H, Grazioli L, Tsunoo M, Tinti R, Frittoli B, Gambarini S, Morone M, Motosugi U, Colagrande S (2010) Can MR fluoroscopic triggering technique and slow rate injection provide appropriate arterial phase images with reducing artifacts on gadoxetic acid-DTPA (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced hepatic MR imaging? J Magn Reson Imaging 32:334-340. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.22241

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Feuerlein S, Boll DT, Gupta RT, Ringe KI, Marin D, Merkle EM (2011) Gadoxetate disodium-enhanced hepatic MRI: dose-dependent contrast dynamics of hepatic parenchyma and portal vein. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196:W18-W24. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.10.4387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Motosugi U, Ichikawa T, Sou H, Sano K, Ichikawa S, Tominaga L, Araki T (2009) Dilution method of gadolinium ethoxybenzyl diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). J Magn Reson Imaging 30:849-854. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21913

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tanimoto A, Higuchi N, Ueno A (2012) Reduction of ringing artifacts in the arterial phase of gadoxetic acid-enhanced dynamic MR imaging. Magn Reson Med Sci 11:91-97. https://doi.org/10.2463/mrms.11.91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ringe KI, Husarik DB, Sirlin CB, Merkle EM (2010) Gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI of the liver: part 1, protocol optimization and lesion appearance in the noncirrhotic liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:13-28. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.10.4392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zech CJ, Vos B, Nordell A, Urich M, Blomqvist L, Breuer J, Reiser MF, Weinmann HJ (2009) Vascular enhancement in early dynamic liver MR imaging in an animal model: comparison of two injection regimen and two different doses Gd-EOB-DTPA (gadoxetic acid) with standard Gd-DTPA. Invest Radiol 44:305-310. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181a24512

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kim YK, Lin WC, Sung K, Raman SS, Margolis D, Lim Y, Gu S, Lu D (2016) Reducing Artifacts during Arterial Phase of Gadoxetate Disodium-enhanced MR Imaging: Dilution Method versus Reduced Injection Rate. Radiology 283:429-437. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016160241

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Moore KP, Wong F, Gines P, Bernardi M, Ochs A, Salerno F, Angeli P, Porayko M, Moreau R, Garcia-Tsao G, Jimenez W, Planas R, Arroyo V (2003) The management of ascites in cirrhosis: report on the consensus conference of the International Ascites Club. Hepatology 38:258-266. https://doi.org/10.1053/jhep.2003.50315

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cruite I, Schroeder M, Merkle EM, Sirlin CB (2010) Gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI of the liver: part 2, protocol optimization and lesion appearance in the cirrhotic liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:29-41. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.10.4538

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Tamada T, Ito K, Sone T, Yamamoto A, Yoshida K, Kakuba K, Tanimoto D, Higashi H, Yamashita T (2009) Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of abdominal solid organ and major vessel: comparison of enhancement effect between Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-DTPA. J Magn Reson Imaging 29:636-640. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21689

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pietryga JA, Burke LM, Marin D, Jaffe TA, Bashir MR (2014) Respiratory motion artifact affecting hepatic arterial phase imaging with gadoxetate disodium: examination recovery with a multiple arterial phase acquisition. Radiology 271:426-434. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13131988

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Motosugi U, Bannas P, Bookwalter CA, Sano K, Reeder SB (2016) An investigation of transient severe motion related to gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 279:93-102. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015150642

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kim SY, Park SH, Wu EH, Wang ZJ, Hope TA, Chang WC, Yeh BM (2015) Transient respiratory motion artifact during arterial phase MRI with gadoxetate disodium: risk factor analyses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 204:1220-1227. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.13677

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hirokawa Y, Isoda H, Maetani YS, Arizono S, Shimada K, Togashi K (2008) MRI artifact reduction and quality improvement in the upper abdomen with PROPELLER and prospective acquisition correction (PACE) technique. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:1154-1158. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.3657

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Vu KN, Haldipur AG, Roh AT, Lindholm P, Loening AM (2019) Comparison of End-Expiration Versus End-Inspiration Breath-Holds With Respect to Respiratory Motion Artifacts on T1-Weighted Abdominal MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 212:1024-1029. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.18.20239

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 73, Goryeodae-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 02841, Korea

    Ki Choon Sim, Beom Jin Park, Na Yeon Han, Deuk Jae Sung, Min Ju Kim & Yeo Eun Han

Authors
  1. Ki Choon Sim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Beom Jin Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Na Yeon Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Deuk Jae Sung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Min Ju Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yeo Eun Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Beom Jin Park.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

The Institutional Review Board waived the requirement for informed consent for this retrospective study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sim, K.C., Park, B.J., Han, N.Y. et al. Effects of gadoxetic acid on image quality of arterial multiphase magnetic resonance imaging of liver: comparison study with gadoteric acid-enhanced MRI. Abdom Radiol 44, 4037–4047 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-019-02202-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-019-02202-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation