European Radiology

, Volume 24, Issue 10, pp 2532–2539 | Cite as

Does Gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0T MRI in addition to 64-detector-row contrast-enhanced CT provide better diagnostic performance and change the therapeutic strategy for the preoperative evaluation of colorectal liver metastases?

  • Keitaro Sofue
  • Masakatsu TsurusakiEmail author
  • Takamichi Murakami
  • Shunsuke Onoe
  • Hiroyuki Tokue
  • Kentaro Shibamoto
  • Yasuaki Arai
  • Kazuro Sugimura
Magnetic Resonance



To compare diagnostic performance in the detection of colorectal liver metastases between 64-detector-row contrast-enhanced CT (CE-CT) alone and the combination of CE-CT and gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI (EOB-MRI) at 3.0T, and to assess whether EOB-MRI in addition to CE-CT results in a change to initially planned operative strategy.


A total of 39 patients (27 men, mean age 65 years) with 85 histopathologically confirmed liver metastases were included. At EOB-MRI, unenhanced (T1- and T2-weighted), dynamic, and hepatocyte-phase images were obtained. At CE-CT, four-phase dynamic contrast-enhanced images were obtained. One on-site reader and three off-site readers independently reviewed both CE-CT alone and the combination of CE-CT and EOB-MRI. Sensitivity, positive predictive value, and alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic (AFROC) method were calculated. Differences in therapeutic strategy before and after the EOB-MRI examination were also evaluated.


Sensitivity and area under the AFROC curve with the combination of CE-CT and EOB-MRI were significantly superior to those with CE-CT alone. Changes in surgical therapy were documented in 13 of 39 patients.


The combination of CE-CT and EOB-MRI may provide better diagnostic performance than CE-CT alone for the detection of colorectal liver metastases, and EOB-MRI in addition to CE-CT resulted in changes to the planned operative strategy in one-third of the patients.

Key Points

Accurate preoperative imaging is essential for surgical planning and successful hepatic resection.

Combination of CE-CT and EOB-MRI is useful to detect colorectal liver metastases.

EOB-MRI combined with CE-CT contributes to determine the correct therapeutic strategy.


Colorectal liver metastases Gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging Contrast-enhanced computed tomography Diagnostic performance Therapeutic strategy 



The scientific guarantor of this publication is Masakatsu Tsurusaki. The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. The authors state that this work has not received any funding. One of the authors has significant statistical expertise. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained. Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects (patients) in this study. Methodology: prospective, diagnostic or prognostic study, performed at one institution.


  1. 1.
    Manfredi S, Lepage C, Hatem C, Coatmeur O, Faivre J, Bouvier AM (2006) Epidemiology and management of liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Ann Surg 244:254–259PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Charnsangavej C, Clary B, Fong Y, Grothey A, Pawlik TM, Choti MA (2006) Selection of patients for resection of hepatic colorectal metastases: expert consensus statement. Ann Surg Oncol 13:1261–1268CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Frankel TL, Gian RK, Jarnagin WR (2012) Preoperative imaging for hepatic resection of colorectal cancer metastasis. J Gastrointest Oncol 3:11–18PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    von Falkenhausen MM, Lutterbey G, Morakkabati-Spitz N, Walter O, Gieseke J, Blömer R et al (2006) High-field-strength MR imaging of the liver at 3.0 T: intraindividual comparative study with MR imaging at 1.5 T. Radiology 241:156–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Huppertz A, Haraida S, Kraus A, Zech CJ, Scheidler J, Breuer J et al (2005) Enhancement of focal liver lesions at gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging: correlation with histopathologic findings and spiral CT—initial observations. Radiology 234:468–478CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ward J (2006) New MR techniques for the detection of liver metastases. Cancer Imaging 6:33–42PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    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 6:43–52CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hammerstingl R, Huppertz A, Breuer J, Balzer T, Blakeborough A, Carter R 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 18:457–467CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Muhi A, Ichikawa T, Motosugi U, Sou H, Nakajima H, Sano K et al (2011) Diagnosis of colorectal hepatic metastases: comparison of contrast-enhanced CT, contrast-enhanced US, superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced MRI, and gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 34:326–335CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim YK, Park G, Kim CS, Yu HC, Han YM (2012) Diagnostic efficacy of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for the detection and characterization of liver metastases: comparison with multidetector-row CT. Br J Radiol 85:539–547PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Scharitzer M, Ba-Ssalamah A, Ringl H, Kölblinger C, Grünberger T, Weber M et al (2013) Preoperative evaluation of colorectal liver metastases: comparison between gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0-T MRI and contrast-enhanced MDCT with histopathological correlation. Eur Radiol 23:2187–2196CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Berger-Kulemann V, Schima W, Baroud S, Koelblinger C, Kaczirek K, Gruenberger T et al (2012) Gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0 T MR imaging versus multidetector-row CT in the detection of colorectal metastases in fatty liver using intraoperative ultrasound and histopathology as a standard of reference. Eur J Surg Oncol 38:670–676CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sofue K, Tsurusaki M, Tokue H, Arai Y, Sugimura K (2011) 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 21:2336–2343CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chang KJ, Kamel IR, Macura KJ, Bluemke DA (2008) 3.0-T MR imaging of the abdomen: comparison with 1.5 T. Radiographics 28:1983–1998CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Goshima S, Kanematsu M, Watanabe H, Kondo H, Shiratori Y, Onozuka M et al (2010) Hepatic hemangioma and metastasis: differentiation with gadoxetate disodium-enhanced 3-T MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:941–946CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tateyama A, Fukukura Y, Takumi K, Shindo T, Kumagae Y, Kamimura K et al (2012) Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging features of hepatic hemangioma compared with enhanced computed tomography. World J Gastroenterol 18:6269–6276PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Motosugi U, Ichikawa T, Sou H, Sano K, Tominaga L, Kitamura T et al (2009) Liver parenchymal enhancement of hepatocyte-phase images in Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging: which biological markers of the liver function affect the enhancement? J Magn Reson Imaging 30:1042–1046CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kim YK, Lee MW, Lee WJ, Kim SH, Rhim H, Lim JH et al (2012) Diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity of diffusion-weighted and of gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3-T MR imaging alone or in combination in the detection of small liver metastasis (≤1.5 cm in diameter). Investig Radiol 47:159–166Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Donati OF, Fischer MA, Chuck N, Hunziker R, Weishaupt D, Reiner CS (2013) Accuracy and confidence of Gd-EOB-DTPA enhanced MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging alone and in combination for the diagnosis of liver metastases. Eur J Radiol 82:822–828CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Seo HJ, Kim MJ, Lee JD, Chung WS, Kim YE (2011) Gadoxetate disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging versus contrast-enhanced 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for the detection of colorectal liver metastases. Investig Radiol 46:548–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Keitaro Sofue
    • 1
    • 2
  • Masakatsu Tsurusaki
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • Takamichi Murakami
    • 3
  • Shunsuke Onoe
    • 4
  • Hiroyuki Tokue
    • 1
  • Kentaro Shibamoto
    • 1
  • Yasuaki Arai
    • 1
  • Kazuro Sugimura
    • 2
  1. 1.Division of Diagnostic RadiologyNational Cancer Center HospitalTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Department of Radiology, Graduate School of MedicineKobe UniversityKobeJapan
  3. 3.Department of Radiology, Faculty of MedicineKinki UniversityOsakasayamaJapan
  4. 4.Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic SurgeryNational Cancer Center HospitalTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations