Abstract
Objective
To compare quantitatively and qualitatively hepatocyte-phase images obtained 10 and 20 min (Images-10, and Images-20) after injection of gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine-pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA) to detect liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma on 3.0 T MR imaging.
Methods
A total of 48 patients (26 men, 22 women; mean age, 64 years) with 88 histopathologically confirmed liver metastases underwent Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging. Tumour-to-liver contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), signal intensity gain (SIG) of liver parenchyma and overall image quality were analysed. Two radiologists independently reviewed two sets of MR images: set 1, unenhanced (T1- and T2-weighted), dynamic images and Images-10; set 2, unenhanced, dynamic and Images-20. Sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) to detect liver metastases, and diagnostic performance using the alternative free-response receiver operating characteristics (AFROC) method were calculated.
Results
The mean tumour-to-liver CNR, SIG of liver parenchyma and overall image quality on Images-20 were significantly higher than those on Images-10. The overall image quality of “fair to excellent” was achieved on both images in 93.8% of the patients. Sensitivity, PPV and area under the AFROC curve on set 1 were similar to set 2, including lesions <1 cm.
Conclusion
In detecting liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma, Images-10 could replace Images-20 in 3.0 T MR imaging.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
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 195:785–792
Vogl TJ, Kummel S, Hammerstingl R et al (1996) Liver tumors: comparison of MR imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-DTPA. Radiology 200:59–67
Reimer P, Rummeny EJ, Ket S et al (1996) Phase II clinical evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA: dose, safety aspects, and pulse sequence. Radiology 199:177–183
Huppertz A, Haraida S, Kraus A et al (2005) Enhancement of focal liver lesions at gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging: correlation with histopathologic findings and spiral CT–initial observations. Radiology 234:468–478
Bluemke DA, Sahani D, Amendola M et al (2005) Efficacy and safety of MR imaging with liver-specific contrast agent: U.S. multicenter phase III study. Radiology 237:89–98
Reimer P, Rummeny EJ, Daldrup HE et al (1997) Enhancement characteristics of liver metastases, hepatocellular carcinomas, and hemangiomas with Gd-EOB-DTPA: preliminary results with dynamic MR imaging. Eur Radiol 7:275–280
Stern W, Schick F, Kopp AF et al (2000) Dynamic MR imaging of liver metastases with Gd-EOB-DTPA. Acta Radiol 41:255–262
Ward J (2006) New MR techniques for the detection of liver metastases. Cancer Imaging 6:33–42
Zech CJ, Herrmann KA, Reiser MF, Schoenberg SO (2007) MR imaging in patients with suspected liver metastases: value of liver-specific contrast agent Gd-EOB-DTPA. Magn Reson Med Sci 6:43–52
Hammerstingl R, Huppertz A, Breuer J et al (2008) Diagnostic efficacy of gadoxetic acid (Primovist)-enhanced MRI and spiral CT for a therapeutic strategy: comparison with intraoperative and histopathologic findings in focal liver lesions. Eur Radiol 18:457–467
Zech CJ, Grazioli L, Breuer J, Reiser MF, Schoenberg SO (2008) Diagnostic performance and description of morphological features of focal nodular hyperplasia in Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging: results of a multicenter trial. Invest Radiol 43:504–511
Motosugi U, Ichikawa T, Tominaga L et al (2009) Delay before the hepatocyte phase of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging: is it possible to shorten the examination time? Eur Radiol 19:2623–2629
Hussain SM, Wielopolski PA, Martin DR (2005) Abdominal magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 T: problem or a promise for the future? Top Magn Reson Imaging 16:325–335
Merkle EM, Dale BM (2006) Abdominal MRI at 3.0 T: the basics revisited. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1524–1532
Akisik FM, Sandrasegaran K, Aisen AM, Lin C, Lall C (2007) Abdominal MR imaging at 3.0 T. Radiographics 27:1433–1444
Choi JY, Kim MJ, Chung YE et al (2008) Abdominal applications of 3.0-T MR imaging: comparative review versus a 1.5-T system. Radiographics 28:30
Tsurusaki M, Semelka RC, Zapparoli M et al (2008) Quantitative and qualitative comparison of 3.0 T and 1.5 T MR imaging of the liver in patients with diffuse parenchymal liver disease. Eur J Radiol 72:314–320
Ramalho M, Herédia V, Tsurusaki M, Altun E, Semelka RC (2009) Quantitative and qualitative comparison of 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla MRI in patients with chronic liver diseases. J Magn Reson Imaging 29:869–879
Yamashita Y, Ogata I, Urata J et al (1997) Cavenous hemangioma of the liver; pathologic correlation with dynamic CT findings. Radiology 203:121–125
Goshima S, Kanematsu M, Watanabe H et al (2010) Hepatic hemangioma and metastasis; differentiation with gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI with 3 T system. AJR Am J Roentogenol 195:941–946
Semelka RC, Hussain SM, Marcos HB, Woosley JT (2000) Perilesional enhancement of hepatic metastases: correlation between MR imaging and histopathologic findings - initial observations. Radiology 215:89–94
Nasu K, Kuroki Y, Nawano S et al (2006) Hepatic metastases: diffusion-weighted sensitivity-encoding versus SPIO-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 239:122–130
Shimada K, Isoda H, Hirokawa Y et al (2010) Comparison of gadolinium-EOB-DTPA-enhanced and diffusion-weighted liver MRI for detection of small hepatic metastases. Eur Radiol 20:2690–2698
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sofue, K., Tsurusaki, M., Tokue, H. et al. Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced 3.0 T MR imaging: quantitative and qualitative comparison of hepatocyte-phase images obtained 10 min and 20 min after injection for the detection of liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Eur Radiol 21, 2336–2343 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2197-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2197-0