European Radiology

, Volume 20, Issue 11, pp 2690–2698 | Cite as

Comparison of gadolinium-EOB-DTPA-enhanced and diffusion-weighted liver MRI for detection of small hepatic metastases

  • Kotaro Shimada
  • Hiroyoshi Isoda
  • Yuusuke Hirokawa
  • Shigeki Arizono
  • Toshiya Shibata
  • Kaori Togashi
Magnetic Resonance

Abstract

Objective

To compare the accuracy of gadolinium ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced MRI with that of diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) in the detection of small hepatic metastases (2 cm or smaller).

Methods

Forty-five patients underwent abdominal MRI at 3 T, including T1-weighted imaging (T1WI), T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), heavily T2WI (HASTE), DWI with a b-value of 500 s/mm2 and contrast-enhanced MRI with Gd-EOB-DTPA. Two groups were assigned and compared: group A (T1WI, T2WI, HASTE and contrast-enhanced study with Gd-EOB-DTPA), and group B (T1WI, T2WI, HASTE and DWI). Two observers independently interpreted the images obtained in a random order. For all hepatic metastases, the diagnostic performance using each imaging set was evaluated by receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

Results

A total of 51 hepatic metastases were confirmed. The area under the ROC curve (Az) of group A was larger than that of group B, and the difference in the mean Az values between the two image sets was statistically significant, whereas, there were three metastases that lay near thin vessels or among multiple cysts and were better visualised in group B than in group A.

Conclusion

Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI showed higher accuracy in the detection of small metastases than DWI.

Keywords

MR Gd-EOB-DTPA Diffusion-weighted imaging Hepatic metastasis Liver 

References

  1. 1.
    Hamm B, Staks T, Muhler A et al (1995) Phase I clinical evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA as a hepatobiliary MR contrast agent: safety, pharmacokinetics, and MR imaging. Radiology 195:785–792PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vogl TJ, Kummel S, Hammerstingl R et al (1996) Liver tumors: comparison of MR imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-DTPA. Radiology 200:59–67PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reimer P, Rummeny EJ, Shamsi K et al (1996) Phase II clinical evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA: dose, safety aspects, and pulse sequence. Radiology 199:177–183PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zech CJ, Herrmann KA, Reiser MF et al (2007) MR imaging in patients with suspected liver metastases: value of liver-specific contrast agent Gd-EOB-DTPA. Magn Reson Med Sci 6:43–52CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ichikawa T, Haradome H, Hachiya J et al (1998) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging with a single-shot echoplanar sequence: detection and characterization of focal hepatic lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 170:397–402PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Xu PJ, Yan FH, Wang JH et al (2009) Added value of breathhold diffusion-weighted MRI in detection of small hepatocellular carcinoma lesions compared with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI alone using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. J Magn Reson Imaging 29:341–349CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fukatsu H (2003) 3T MR for clinical use: update. Magn Reson Med Sci 2:37–45CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Naganawa S, Sato C, Nakamura T et al (2005) Diffusion-weighted images of the liver: comparison of tumor detection before and after contrast enhancement with superparamagnetic iron oxide. J Magn Reson Imaging 21:836–840CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nasu K, Kuroki Y, Nawano S et al (2006) Hepatic metastases: diffusion-weighted sensitivity-encoding versus SPIO-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 239:122–130CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    No authors (2000) World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 284:3043–3045Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Persijn van Meerten EL, Gelderblom H, Bloem JL (2009) RECIST revised: implications for the radiologist. A review article on the modified RECIST guideline. Eur Radiol. doi: 10.1007/s00330-009-1685-y [Epub ahead of print]PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mathieu D, Vilgrain V, Mahfouz A et al (1997) Benign liver tumors. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 5:255–288PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mortele KJ, Ros PR (2001) Cystic focal liver lesions in the adult: differential CT and MR imaging features. Radiographics 21:895–910PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Horton KM, Bluemke DA, Hruban RH et al (1999) CT and MR imaging of benign hepatic and biliary tumors. Radiographics 19:431–451PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim T, Federle MP, Baron RL et al (2001) Discrimination of small hepatic hemangiomas from hypervascular malignant tumors smaller than 3 cm with three-phase helical CT. Radiology 219:699–706PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pedro MS, Semelka RC, Braga L (2002) MR imaging of hepatic metastases. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 10:15–29CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Danet IM, Semelka RC, Leonardou P et al (2003) Spectrum of MRI appearances of untreated metastases of the liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:809–817PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Low RN, Gurney J (2007) Diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) in the oncology patient: value of breathhold DWI compared to unenhanced and gadolinium-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 25:848–858CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Huppertz A, Balzer T, Blakeborough A et al (2004) Improved detection of focal liver lesions at MR imaging: multicenter comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR images with intraoperative findings. Radiology 230:266–275CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bluemke DA, Sahani D, Amendola M et al (2005) Efficacy and safety of MR imaging with liver-specific contrast agent: US multicenter phase III study. Radiology 237:89–98CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zech CJ, Schoenberg SO, Herrmann KA et al (2004) Modern visualization of the liver with MRT. Current trends and future perspectives. Radiologe 44:1160–1169CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Onishi H, Murakami T, Kim T et al (2006) Hepatic metastases: detection with multi-detector row CT, SPIO-enhanced MR imaging, and both techniques combined. Radiology 239:131–138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Huppertz A, Balzer T, Blakeborough A et al (2004) European EOB Study Group. Improved detection of focal liver lesions at MR imaging: multicenter comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR images with intraoperative findings. Radiology 230:266–275CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bluemke DA, Sahani D, Amendola M et al (2005) Efficacy and safety of MR imaging with liver-specific contrast agent: US multicenter phase III study. Radiology 237:89–98CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vossen JA, Buijs M, Geschwind JF et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted and Gd-EOB-DTPA-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for characterization of tumor necrosis in an animal model. J Comput Assist Tomogr 33:626–630CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Choi JS, Kim MJ, Choi JY et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of liver on 3.0-Tesla system: effect of intravenous administration of gadoxetic acid disodium. Eur Radiol. doi: 10.1007/s00330-009-1651-8 [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kotaro Shimada
    • 1
  • Hiroyoshi Isoda
    • 1
  • Yuusuke Hirokawa
    • 1
  • Shigeki Arizono
    • 1
  • Toshiya Shibata
    • 1
  • Kaori Togashi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear MedicineKyoto University Graduate School of MedicineKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations