Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics

, Volume 70, Issue 3, pp 1859–1867 | Cite as

The Correlation of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and MRI Perfusion Quantitative Analysis in Rabbit VX2 Liver Cancer

  • Zhiming Xiang
  • Qianwen Liang
  • Changhong Liang
  • Guimian Zhong
Original Paper
First Online:
  • 244 Downloads

Abstract

Our objective is to explore the value of liver cancer contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and MRI perfusion quantitative analysis in liver cancer and the correlation between these two analysis methods. Rabbit VX2 liver cancer model was established in this study. CEUS was applied. Sono Vue was applied in rabbits by ear vein to dynamically observe and record the blood perfusion and changes in the process of VX2 liver cancer and surrounding tissue. MRI perfusion quantitative analysis was used to analyze the mean enhancement time and change law of maximal slope increasing, which were further compared with the pathological examination results. Quantitative indicators of liver cancer CEUS and MRI perfusion quantitative analysis were compared, and the correlation between them was analyzed by correlation analysis. Rabbit VX2 liver cancer model was successfully established. CEUS showed that time–intensity curve of rabbit VX2 liver cancer showed “fast in, fast out” model while MRI perfusion quantitative analysis showed that quantitative parameter MTE of tumor tissue increased and MSI decreased: the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.01). The diagnostic results of CEUS and MRI perfusion quantitative analysis were not significantly different (P > 0.05). However, the quantitative parameter of them were significantly positively correlated (P < 0.05). CEUS and MRI perfusion quantitative analysis can both dynamically monitor the liver cancer lesion and surrounding liver parenchyma, and the quantitative parameters of them are correlated. The combined application of both is of importance in early diagnosis of liver cancer.

Keywords

Liver cancer VX2 Contrast-enhanced ultrasound MRI perfusion quantitative analysis Quantitative analysis 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Ladep, N. G., Khan, S. A., et al. (2014). Incidence and mortality of primary liver cancer in England and Wales: Changing patterns and ethnic variations. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 20(6), 1544–1553.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Altekruse, S. F., Henley, S. J., et al. (2014). Changing hepatocellular carcinoma incidence and liver cancer mortality rates in the United States. American Journal of Gastroenterology, 109(4), 542–553.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Treska, V., Cerna, M., Liska, V., et al. (2014). Surgery for breast cancer liver metastases: Factors determining results. Anticancer Research, 34(3), 1281–1286.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    He, Y. (2014). Role of surgery in the treatment of liver metastases from gastric cancer. Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi, 17(2), 105–107.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Govaert, K. M., Emmink, B. L., Nijkamp, M. W., Cheung, Z. J., Steller, E. J., Fatrai, S., et al. (2014). Hypoxia after liver surgery imposes an aggressive cancer stem cell phenotype on residual tumor cells. Annals of Surgery, 259(4), 750–759.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Causey, M. W., Nelson, D., Johnson, E. K., Maykel, J., Davis, B., & Rivadeneira, D. E. (2014). The impact of model for end-stage liver disease-Na in predicting morbidity and mortality following elective colon cancer surgery irrespective of underlying liver disease. American Journal of Surgery, 207(4), 520–526.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sporea, I., Badea, R., Popescu, A., Sparchez, Z., Sirli, R. L., Danila, M., et al. (2014). Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) for the evaluation of focal liver lesions: A prospective multicenter study of its usefulness in clinical practice. Ultraschall in der Medizin, 35(3), 259–266.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Trenker, C., Kunsch, S., Michl, P., Wissniowski, T. T., Goerg, K., & Goerg, C. (2014). Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in hepatic lymphoma: Retrospective evaluation in 38 cases. Ultraschall in der Medizin, 35(2), 142–148.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bertolotto, M., Serafini, G., Sconfienza, L. M., Lacelli, F., Cavallaro, M., Coslovich, A., et al. (2014). The use of CEUS in the diagnosis of retinal/choroidal detachment and associated intraocular masses: Preliminary investigation in patients with equivocal findings at conventional ultrasound. Ultraschall in der Medizin, 35(2), 173–180.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Beets-Tan, R. G. (2014). Randomized multicentre trial of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI versus conventional MRI or CT in the staging of colorectal cancer liver metastases (Br J Surg 2014; 101: 613–621). British Journal of Surgery, 101(6), 622.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zech, C. J., Korpraphong, P., Huppertz, A., Denecke, T., Kim, M. J., Tanomkiat, W., et al. (2014). Randomized multicentre trial of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI versus conventional MRI or CT in the staging of colorectal cancer liver metastases. British Journal of Surgery, 101(6), 613–621.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhao, Q., Wang, Y., Cao, Y., Chen, A., Ren, M., Ge, Y., et al. (2014). Potential health risks of heavy metals in cultivated topsoil and grain, including correlations with human primary liver, lung and gastric cancer, in Anhui province, Eastern China. Science of the Total Environment, 470–471, 340–347.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shariff, M. I., Cox, I. J., Gomaa, A. I., Khan, S. A., Gedroyc, W., & Taylor-Robinson, S. D. (2009). Hepatocellular carcinoma: current trends in worldwide epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis and therapeutics. Expert Review of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 3(4), 353–367.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wilson, S. R., & Burns, P. N. (2006). An algorithm for the diagnosis of focal liver masses using microbubble contrast-enhanced pulse-inversion sonography. American Journal of Roentgenology, 186(5), 1401–1412.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tchelepi, H., & Ralls, P. W. (2004). Ultrasound of focal liver masses. Ultrasound Q, 20(4), 155–169.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Namimoto, T., Yamashita, Y., et al. (1997). Focal liver masses: Characterization with diffusion-weighted echo-planar MR imaging. Radiology, 204(3), 739–744.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang, G. Y., Zhou, X. F., Zhou, X. Y., Wen, Q. Y., You, B. G., Liu, Y., et al. (2013). Effect of alginate–chitosan sustained release microcapsules for transhepatic arterial embolization in VX2 rabbit liver cancer model. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, Part A, 101(11), 3192–3200.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tian, M., Lu, W., Zhang, R., Xiong, C., Ensor, J., Nazario, J., et al. (2013). Tumor uptake of hollow gold nanospheres after intravenous and intra-arterial injection: PET/CT study in a rabbit VX2 liver cancer model. Molecular Imaging and Biology, 15(5), 614–624.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cao, W., Xu, X., et al. (2013). Tumor angiogenesis after heated lipiodol infusion via the hepatic artery in a rabbit model of VX2 liver cancer. PLoS One, 8(4), e61583.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Luo, S. H., Zheng, C. S., Feng, G. S., Sun, X. M., Zhou, G. F., Liang, H. M., et al. (2010). Experimental studies of rAd-p53 injection by interventional approach for the treatment of rabbit VX2 liver cancer. Zhonghua Gan Zang Bing Za Zhi, 18(7), 502–505.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cao, W., Wan, Y., Liang, Z. H., Duan, Y. Y., Liu, X., Wang, Z. M., et al. (2010). Heated lipiodol as an embolization agent for transhepatic arterial embolization in VX2 rabbit liver cancer model. European Journal of Radiology, 73(2), 412–419.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mancini, M., Di Donato, O., Saldalamacchia, G., Liuzzi, R., Rivellese, A., & Salvatore, M. (2013). Contrast-enhanced ultrasound evaluation of peripheral microcirculation in diabetic patients: Effects of cigarette smoking. La Radiologia Medica, 118(2), 206–214.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Clevert, D. A., & D’Anastasi, M. (2013). Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and microcirculation: Efficiency through dynamics–current developments. Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation, 53(1–2), 171–186.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Amarteifio, E., Wormsbecher, S., Demirel, S., Krix, M., Braun, S., Rehnitz, C., et al. (2013). Assessment of skeletal muscle microcirculation in type 2 diabetes mellitus using dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound: A pilot study. Diabetes and Vascular Disease Research, 10(5), 468–470.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Amarteifio, E., Krix, M., Wormsbecher, S., Demirel, S., Braun, S., Delorme, S., et al. (2013). Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound for assessment of therapy effects on skeletal muscle microcirculation in peripheral arterial disease: Pilot study. European Journal of Radiology, 82(4), 640–646.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rees, J. D., Pilcher, J., et al. (2007). A comparison of clinical vs ultrasound determined synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis utilizing gray-scale, power Doppler and the intravenous microbubble contrast agent ‘Sono-Vue’. Rheumatology (Oxford), 46(3), 454–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jang, H. J., Kim, T. K., et al. (2006). Imaging of malignant liver masses: Characterization and detection. Ultrasound Q, 22(1), 19–29.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Watanabe, R., Matsumura, M., et al. (2005). Characterization of tumor imaging with microbubble-based ultrasound contrast agent, sonazoid, in rabbit liver. Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin, 28(6), 972–977.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zuber-Jerger, I., Schacherer, D., Woenckhaus, M., Jung, E. M., Scholmerich, J., & Klebl, F. (2009). Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in diagnosing liver malignancy. Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation, 43(1–2), 109–118.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yoneyama, T., Fukukura, Y., Kamimura, K., Takumi, K., Umanodan, A., Ueno, S., et al. (2014). Efficacy of liver parenchymal enhancement and liver volume to standard liver volume ratio on Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI for estimation of liver function. European Radiology, 24(4), 857–865.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Verloh, N., Haimerl, M., Zeman, F., Schlabeck, M., Barreiros, A., Loss, M., et al. (2014). Assessing liver function by liver enhancement during the hepatobiliary phase with Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI at 3 Tesla. European Radiology, 24(5), 1013–1019.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Talakic, E., Steiner, J., Kalmar, P., Lutfi, A., Quehenberger, F., Reiter, U., et al. (2014). Gd-EOB-DTPA enhanced MRI of the liver: Correlation of relative hepatic enhancement, relative renal enhancement, and liver to kidneys enhancement ratio with serum hepatic enzyme levels and eGFR. European Journal of Radiology, 83(4), 607–611.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Saito, K., Ledsam, J., Sourbron, S., Hashimoto, T., Araki, Y., Akata, S., et al. (2014). Measuring hepatic functional reserve using low temporal resolution Gd-EOB-DTPA dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: A preliminary study comparing galactosyl human serum albumin scintigraphy with indocyanine green retention. European Radiology, 24(1), 112–119.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhiming Xiang
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Qianwen Liang
    • 3
  • Changhong Liang
    • 2
  • Guimian Zhong
    • 3
  1. 1.Southern Medical UniversityGuangzhouPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Department of Radiology, Guangdong Academy of Medical SciencesGuangdong General HospitalGuangzhouPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyPanyu central Hospital of GuangzhouGuangzhouPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations