Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Practical use and pitfalls of hepatocyte-specific contrast agents (HSCAs) for pediatric hepatic and biliary magnetic resonance imaging

  • Pictorial Essay
  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging is commonly used to evaluate for hepatic and biliary pathology in the pediatric population. Recently, there has been increased use of hepatocyte-specific contrast agents (HSCAs), such as Gadoxetate disodium in children. Traditionally, HSCAs have been used to characterize focal liver lesions. However, these agents can also be used to problem solve specific hepatic or biliary diagnostic dilemmas. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the practical uses of HSCA in children with both hepatic and biliary indications, and review the corresponding imaging findings. We will highlight the diagnostic uses of HSCA in children, as well as pitfalls encountered.

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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kolbe AB, Podberesky DJ, Zhang B, Towbin AJ (2015) The impact of hepatocyte phase imaging from infancy to young adulthood in patients with a known or suspected liver lesion. Pediatr Radiol 45(3):354–365. doi:10.1007/s00247-014-3160-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Meyers AB, Towbin AJ, Serai S, Geller JI, Podberesky DJ (2011) Characterization of pediatric liver lesions with gadoxetate disodium. Pediatr Radiol 41(9):1183–1197. doi:10.1007/s00247-011-2148-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Smith EA, Salisbury S, Martin R, Towbin AJ (2012) Incidence and etiology of new liver lesions in pediatric patients previously treated for malignancy. Am J Roentgenol 199(1):186–191. doi:10.2214/AJR.11.7690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Tamrazi A, Vasanawala SS (2011) Functional hepatobiliary MR imaging in children. Pediatr Radiol 41(10):1250–1258. doi:10.1007/s00247-011-2086-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ringe KI, Husarik DB, Gupta RT, Boll DT, Merkle EM (2011) Hepatobiliary transit times of gadoxetate disodium (Primovist(R)) for protocol optimization of comprehensive MR imaging of the biliary system—What is normal? Eur J Radiol 79(2):201–205. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.03.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. HE O (2015) Pediatric supplemental new drug application—Gadoxetate disodium. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DevelopmentResources/UCM446880.pdf

  7. Prescribing information for Gadoxetate disodium (2015). http://labeling.bayerhealthcare.com/html/products/pi/Eovist_PI.pdf. Accessed 7 Sept 2016

  8. ACR manual on contrast media. Version 10.2 (2016). American College of Radiology. www.acr.org. Accessed 7 Sept 2016

  9. Chung EM, Cube R, Lewis RB, Conran RM (2010) From the archives of the AFIP: pediatric liver masses: radiologic–pathologic correlation part 1. Benign tumors. Radiogr Rev Publ Radiol Soc N Am Inc 30(3):801–826. doi:10.1148/rg.303095173

    Google Scholar 

  10. Joyner BL Jr, Levin TL, Goyal RK, Newman B (2005) Focal nodular hyperplasia of the liver: a sequela of tumor therapy. Pediatr Radiol 35(12):1234–1239. doi:10.1007/s00247-005-1558-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Moore M, Anupindi SA, Mattei P, Sengupta A, Darge K (2009) Mesenchymal cystic hamartoma of the liver: MR imaging with pathologic correlation. J Radiol Case Rep 3(7):22–26. doi:10.3941/jrcr.v3i7.243

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Mulliken JB, Glowacki J (1982) Hemangiomas and vascular malformations in infants and children: a classification based on endothelial characteristics. Plast Reconstr Surg 69(3):412–422

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 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. Am J Roentgenol 195(1):13–28. doi:10.2214/AJR.10.4392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chung EM, Lattin GE Jr, Cube R, et al. (2011) From the archives of the AFIP: pediatric liver masses: radiologic–pathologic correlation. Part 2. Malignant tumors. Radiogr Rev Publ Radiol Soc N Am Inc 31(2):483–507. doi:10.1148/rg.312105201

    Google Scholar 

  15. Meyers AB, Towbin AJ, Geller JI, Podberesky DJ (2012) Hepatoblastoma imaging with gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI—typical, atypical, pre- and post-treatment evaluation. Pediatr Radiol 42(7):859–866. doi:10.1007/s00247-012-2366-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Roebuck DJ, Aronson D, Clapuyt P, et al. (2007) 2005 PRETEXT: a revised staging system for primary malignant liver tumours of childhood developed by the SIOPEL Group. Pediatr Radiol 37(2):123–132; quiz 249–150. doi:10.1007/s00247-006-0361-5

  17. 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. Am J Roentgenol 195(1):29–41. doi:10.2214/AJR.10.4538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Choi JW, Lee JM, Kim SJ, et al. (2013) Hepatocellular carcinoma: imaging patterns on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR images and their value as an imaging biomarker. Radiology 267(3):776–786. doi:10.1148/radiol.13120775

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatric Radiology, Columbia University Medical Center, Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital, 3959 Broadway, CHONY 3 N, New York, NY, 10032, USA

    Rama S. Ayyala

  2. Department of Radiology, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, 34th Street and Civic Center Blvd., Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Sudha A. Anupindi

  3. Department of Radiology, Boston Children’s Hospital, 300 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    Michael J. Callahan

Authors
  1. Rama S. Ayyala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sudha A. Anupindi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael J. Callahan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rama S. Ayyala.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

This is a retrospective study involving human participants. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ayyala, R.S., Anupindi, S.A. & Callahan, M.J. Practical use and pitfalls of hepatocyte-specific contrast agents (HSCAs) for pediatric hepatic and biliary magnetic resonance imaging. Abdom Radiol 42, 502–520 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0916-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0916-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation