Literature DB >> 11997562

Characterization of liver lesions with mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced MR imaging: multicenter study comparing MR and dual-phase spiral CT.

Matthijs Oudkerk1, Carl G Torres, Bin Song, Matthias König, Jan Grimm, Jaime Fernandez-Cuadrado, Bart Op de Beeck, Moritz Marquardt, Pieter van Dijk, Jan Cees de Groot.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether mangafodipir trisodium (Mn-DPDP)-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging surpasses dual-phase spiral computed tomography (CT) in differentiating focal liver lesions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred forty-five patients who had or were suspected of having focal liver lesions were included in a multicenter study and underwent dual-phase spiral CT and enhanced MR imaging. Image interpretations performed by independent experienced radiologists were compared with the final diagnosis that was based on all available clinical information (including histopathologic findings in 77 patients) and that was determined with consensus. Differences in classifications by using either enhanced MR imaging or dual-phase spiral CT were analyzed with the McNemar test, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to compare the diagnostic performance of enhanced MR imaging and dual-phase spiral CT.
RESULTS: Lesion classification was correct in 108 (74%) patients with enhanced MR imaging and in 83 (57%) with dual-phase spiral CT (P =.001). Lesions were correctly classified as either malignant or benign in 123 (85%) patients with enhanced MR imaging and in 98 (68%) with dual-phase spiral CT (P =.001). Classification of lesions as either hepatocellular or nonhepatocellular was correct in 130 (90%) patients with enhanced MR imaging and in 93 (64%) with dual-phase spiral CT (P =.001). These differences remained when analyses were restricted to histopathologically confirmed diagnoses. Comparison of the ROC curves illustrated that enhanced MR imaging performance surpassed that of dual-phase spiral CT.
CONCLUSION: Mn-DPDP-enhanced MR imaging is superior to dual-phase spiral CT in classification of focal liver lesions. Copyright RSNA, 2002

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11997562     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2232010318

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  28 in total

Review 1.  What is the current situation in liver imaging?

Authors:  M M Uggowitzer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Effect of hepatobiliary uptake of Gd-EOB-DTPA on the hepatic venous phase of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging on a 3.0-T apparatus: comparison between Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-DTPA.

Authors:  Yasunari Fujinaga; Ayumi Ohya; Tsuyoshi Matsushita; Masahiro Kurozumi; Kazuhiko Ueda; Yoshihiro Kitou; Hitoshi Ueda; Masumi Kadoya
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2011-10-19       Impact factor: 2.374

3.  [Multidetector computed tomography of the liver].

Authors:  W Schima; C Kulinna; A Ba-Ssalamah; T Grünberger
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  Liver ablation guidance with acoustic radiation force impulse imaging: challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  B J Fahey; S J Hsu; P D Wolf; R C Nelson; G E Trahey
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2006-07-20       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Clinical management of hepatic malignancies: ferucarbotran-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging versus contrast-enhanced spiral computed tomography.

Authors:  Riccardo Lencioni; Clotilde Della Pina; Jordi Bruix; Pietro Majno; Luigi Grazioli; Giovanni Morana; Antonella Filippone; Andrea Laghi; Carlo Bartolozzi
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 3.199

6.  In vivo guidance and assessment of liver radio-frequency ablation with acoustic radiation force elastography.

Authors:  Brian J Fahey; Rendon C Nelson; Stephen J Hsu; David P Bradway; Douglas M Dumont; Gregg E Trahey
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2008-05-09       Impact factor: 2.998

7.  Characterization of focal liver lesions: comparative study of contrast-enhanced ultrasound versus spiral computed tomography.

Authors:  V Catala; C Nicolau; R Vilana; M Pages; L Bianchi; M Sanchez; C Bru
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-10-27       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 8.  Clinical value of MRI liver-specific contrast agents: a tailored examination for a confident non-invasive diagnosis of focal liver lesions.

Authors:  Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah; Martin Uffmann; Sanjai Saini; Nina Bastati; Christian Herold; Wolfgang Schima
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-09-23       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Effect of new manganese contrast agent on tissue intensities in human volunteers: comparison of 0.23, 0.6 and 1.5 T MRI, a part of a phase I trial.

Authors:  E Chabanova; H S Thomsen; V Løgager; J M Moller; K Brage; K Fogh; J Bovin; J Elmig
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2004-07-16       Impact factor: 2.310

Review 10.  Contrast agents for hepatic MRI.

Authors:  Giovanni Morana; Elisabetta Salviato; Alessandro Guarise
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2007-10-01       Impact factor: 3.909

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.