European Radiology

, Volume 28, Issue 5, pp 2013–2021 | Cite as

CAIPIRINHA-Dixon-TWIST (CDT)-VIBE MR imaging of the liver at 3.0T with gadoxetate disodium: a solution for transient arterial-phase respiratory motion-related artifacts?

  • Leonhard Gruber
  • Vera Rainer
  • Michaela Plaikner
  • Christian Kremser
  • Werner Jaschke
  • Benjamin HenningerEmail author



To determine whether CAIPIRINHA-Dixon-TWIST (CDT) volume-interpolated breath-hold examination (VIBE) improves image quality by reducing gadoxetate-disodium-associated transient arterial-phase motion artefacts in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the liver.

Materials and methods

MRI studies of the liver from 270 patients who had received gadoxetate disodium were retrospectively evaluated in regard to arterial timing accuracy and arterial phase motion artefact severity (VIBE: 90/270, CAIPIRINHA-VIBE: 90/270 and CDT-VIBE: 90/270 cases). Three independent and blinded readers assessed arterial phase timing and motion artefact severity (5-point scale). Interrater agreement was calculated by weighted kappa. Continuous variables were compared via a two-sided ANOVA, categorical variables via a χ2 test. An ordinal regression analysis was performed to identify other predictors of motion artefacts.


CDT-VIBE improved correct late arterial timing rates and reduced motion-related image deterioration rates. Successful late arterial liver visualisation was achieved in 56.7% (VIBE) compared with 66.7% (CAIPIRINHA-VIBE) and 84.4% (CDT-VIBE) (P < 0.0001). Good/excellent image quality was achieved in 56.7% vs. 66.7% and 73.3%, respectively (P = 0.03). Male sex negatively influenced image quality (P = 0.03).


CDT-VIBE increases the diagnostic utility of gadoxetate disodium-based liver MRI by reducing respiratory motion artefacts and optimising late arterial visualisation compared with VIBE and CAIPIRINHA-VIBE.

Key Points

CAIPIRINHA-Dixon-TWIST-VIBE-MRI (CDT) mitigates effects of acute transient dyspnoea caused by gadoxetate disodium.

CDT improves late arterial imaging compared with VIBE and CAIPIRINHA-VIBE.

The rate of ideal late arterial images is higher with CDT-VIBE vs. VIBE or CAIPI-VIBE.

The impact of respiratory motion artefacts on arterial phase images can be reduced.


Diagnostic imaging Contrast media Artefacts Magnetic resonance imaging Liver 



Controlled Aliasing In Parallel Imaging Results In Higher Acceleration Factor


Time-resolved Angiography With Interleaved Stochastic Trajectories




Volume-interpolated Breath-hold Examination


Half Fourier Acquisition Single-shot Turbo Spin Echo


Magnetic Resonance Imaging


Computed Tomography


Transient Severe Motion


T2 Weighted


Hepatocellular Carcinoma


Picture Archiving And Communication System



The authors state that this work has not received any funding.

Compliance with ethical standards


The scientific guarantor of this publication is Benjamin Henninger.

Conflict of interest

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.

Statistics and biometry

Two of the authors have significant statistical expertise.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was not required for this study because of its retrospective nature

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.


• retrospective

• observational

• performed at one institution


  1. 1.
    Davenport MS, Viglianti BL, Al-Hawary MM et al (2013) Comparison of acute transient dyspnea after intravenous administration of gadoxetate disodium and gadobenate dimeglumine: effect on arterial phase image quality. Radiology 266:452–461CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Frericks BB, Loddenkemper C, Huppertz A et al (2009) Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma and cirrhotic liver enhancement using Gd-EOB-DTPA. Am J Roentgenol 193:1053–1060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Darnell A, Forner A, Rimola J et al (2015) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System with MR Imaging: Evaluation in Nodules 20 mm or Smaller Detected in Cirrhosis at Screening US. Radiology 275:141132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bruix J, Sherman M (2011) Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: An update. Hepatology 53(3):1020–1022CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yu JS, Kim KW, Kim EK, Lee JT, Yoo HS (1999) Contrast enhancement of small hepatocellular carcinoma: usefulness of three successive early image acquisitions during multiphase dynamic MR imaging. Am J Roentgenol 173:597–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chanyaputhipong J, Low S-CA, Chow PKH (2011) Gadoxetate Acid-Enhanced MR Imaging for HCC: A Review for Clinicians. Int J Hepatol 2011:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Khosa F, Khan AN, Eisenberg RL (2011) Hypervascular liver lesions on MRI. Am J Roentgenol 197:204–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Choi J-Y, Lee J, Sirlin CB (2014) CT and MR Imaging diagnosis and staging of hepatocellular carcinoma: Part I. Development, growth, and spread: key pathologic and imaging aspects. Radiology 272:635–654CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Davenport MS, Caoili EM, Kaza RK, Hussain HK (2014) Matched within-patient cohort study of transient arterial phase respiratory motion-related artifact in MR imaging of the liver: gadoxetate disodium versus gadobenate dimeglumine. Radiology 272:123–131CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Motosugi U, Bannas P, Bookwalter CA, Sano K, Reeder SB (2016) An investigation of transient severe motion related to gadoxetic acid–enhanced MR Imaging. Radiology 279:93–102CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    McClellan TR, Motosugi U, Middleton MS et al (2017) Intravenous gadoxetate disodium administration reduces breath-holding capacity in the hepatic arterial phase: a multi-center randomized placebo-controlled trial. Radiology 282:361–368CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Davenport MS, Malyarenko DI, Pang Y, Hussain HK, Chenevert TL. (2016) Effect of gadoxetate disodium on arterial phase respiratory waveforms using a quantitative fast Fourier transformatio-based analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208(2):328–336Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Breuer FA, Blaimer M, Heidemann RM, Mueller MF, Griswold MA, Jakob PM (2005) Controlled aliasing in parallel imaging results in higher acceleration (CAIPIRINHA) for multi-slice imaging. Magn Reson Med 53:684–691CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hennig J, Scheffler K, Laubenberger J, Strecker R (1997) Time-resolved projection angiography after bolus injection of contrast agent. Magn Reson Med 37:341–345CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Le Y, Kroeker R, Kipfer HD, Lin C (2012) Development and evaluation of TWIST Dixon for dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI with improved acquisition efficiency and fat suppression. J Magn Reson Imaging 36:483–491CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rofsky NM, Lee VS, Laub G et al (1999) Abdominal MR imaging with a volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination. Radiology 212:876–884CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Michaely HJ, Morelli JN, Budjan J et al (2013) CAIPIRINHA-Dixon-TWIST (CDT)–Volume-Interpolated Breath-Hold Examination (VIBE). Investig Radiol 48:590–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Budjan J, Schoenberg SO, Riffel P (2016) Fast abdominal magnetic resonance Imaging. RöFo: Fortschr Auf Gebiete Rontgenstrahlen Nuklearmedizin 188:551–558Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Budjan J, Ong M, Riffel P et al (2014) CAIPIRINHA-Dixon-TWIST (CDT)-volume-interpolated breath-hold examination (VIBE) for dynamic liver imaging: Comparison of gadoterate meglumine, gadobutrol and gadoxetic acid. Eur J Radiol 83:2007–2012CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kazmierczak PM, Theisen D, Thierfelder KM et al (2015) Improved detection of hypervascular liver lesions with CAIPIRINHA-Dixon-TWIST-volume-interpolated breath-hold examination. Investig Radiol 50:153–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hussain HK, Londy FJ, Francis IR et al (2003) Hepatic arterial phase MR imaging with automated bolus-detection three-dimensional fast gradient-recalled-echo sequence: comparison with test-bolus method. Radiology 226:558–566CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Altman DG (1990) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman and Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kim YK, Lin W-C, Sung K et al (2017) Reducing artifacts during arterial phase of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MR imaging: dilution method versus reduced injection rate. Radiology 283(2):429–437Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Huh J, Kim SY, Yeh BM et al (2015) Troubleshooting arterial-phase MR images of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced liver. Korean J Radiol 16:1207–1215CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Park CM, Park YS, Yoo JL et al (2016) The short breath-hold technique, controlled aliasing in parallel imaging results in higher acceleration, can be the first step to overcoming a degraded hepatic arterial phase in liver magnetic resonance imaging: A Prospective Randomized Control Study. Investig Radiol 51:440–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yoon JH, Lee JM, Yu MH, Kim EJ, Han JK (2016) Triple arterial phase MR imaging with gadoxetic acid using a combination of contrast enhanced time robust angiography, keyhole, and viewsharing techniques and two-dimensional parallel imaging in comparison with conventional single arterial phase. Korean J Radiol 17:522–532CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Haradome H, Grazioli L, Tsunoo M et al (2010) Can MR fluoroscopic triggering technique and slow rate injection provide appropriate arterial phase images with reducing artifacts on gadoxetic acid-DTPA (Gd-EOB-DTPA) -enhanced hepatic MR imaging? J Magn Reson Imaging 32:334–340CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pietryga JA, Burke LMB, Marin D, Jaffe TA, Bashir MR (2014) Respiratory motion artifact affecting hepatic arterial phase imaging with gadoxetate disodium: examination recovery with a multiple arterial phase acquisition. Radiology 271:426–434CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Li H, Xiao Y, Wang S et al (2017) TWIST-VIBE five-arterial-phase technology decreases transient severe motion after bolus injection of Gd-EOB-DTPA. Clin Radiol 72:800.e1–800.e6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Seale MK, Catalano OA, Saini S, Hahn PF, Sahani DV (2009) Hepatobiliary-specific MR contrast agents: role in imaging the liver and biliary tree. Radiographics 29:1725–1748CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Choi J-Y, Lee J, Sirlin CB (2014) CT and MR imaging diagnosis and staging of hepatocellular carcinoma: part II. Extracellular agents, hepatobiliary agents, and ancillary imaging features. Radiology 273:30–50CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Purysko AS, Remer EM, Coppa CP, Leão Filho HM, Thupili CR, Veniero JC (2012) LI-RADS: a case-based review of the new categorization of liver findings in patients with end-stage liver disease. Radiographics 32:1977–1995CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    An C, Rakhmonova G, Choi J-Y, Kim M-J (2016) Liver imaging reporting and data system (LI-RADS) version 2014: understanding and application of the diagnostic algorithm. Clin Mol Hepatol 22:296–307CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mitchell DG, Bruix J, Sherman M, Sirlin CB (2015) LI-RADS (Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System): Summary, discussion, and consensus of the LI-RADS Management Working Group and future directions. Hepatology 61:1056–1065CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chen N, Motosugi U, Morisaka H et al (2015) Added value of a gadoxetic acid-enhanced hepatocyte-phase image to the LI-RADS system for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma. Magn Reson Med Sci 15:49–59CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ding Y, Rao SX, Chen CZ, Li RC, Zeng MS (2015) Usefulness of two-point Dixon fat-water separation technique in gadoxetic acid-enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging. World J Gastroenterol 21:5017–5022CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rosenkrantz AB, Mannelli L, Kim S, Babb JS (2011) Gadolinium-enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging using a 2-point Dixon fat-water separation technique: impact upon image quality and lesion detection. J Comput Assist Tomogr 35:96–101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Polanec SH, Bickel H, Baltzer PAT et al (2017) Respiratory motion artifacts during arterial phase imaging with gadoxetic acid: Can the injection protocol minimize this drawback? J Magn Reson Imaging 46:1107–1114CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leonhard Gruber
    • 1
  • Vera Rainer
    • 1
  • Michaela Plaikner
    • 1
  • Christian Kremser
    • 1
  • Werner Jaschke
    • 1
  • Benjamin Henninger
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyMedical University of InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria

Personalised recommendations