Literature DB >> 15516606

Defining intrahepatic biliary anatomy in living liver transplant donor candidates at mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced MR cholangiography versus conventional T2-weighted MR cholangiography.

Vivian S Lee1, Glenn A Krinsky, Carol A Nazzaro, Jerry S Chang, James S Babb, Jennifer C Lin, Glyn R Morgan, Lewis W Teperman.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare three-dimensional (3D) mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) cholangiography with conventional T2-weighted MR cholangiography for depiction and definition of intrahepatic biliary anatomy in liver transplant donor candidates.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred eight healthy liver transplant donor candidates were examined with two MR cholangiographic methods. All candidates gave written informed consent, and the study was approved by the institutional review board. First, breath-hold transverse and coronal half-Fourier single-shot turbo spin-echo and breath-hold oblique coronal heavily T2-weighted turbo spin-echo sequences were performed. Second, mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced breath-hold fat-suppressed 3D gradient-echo sequences were performed through the ducts (oblique coronal plane) and through the entire liver (transverse plane). Interpretation of biliary anatomy findings, particularly variants affecting right liver lobe biliary drainage, and degree of interpretation confidence at both 3D mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced MR cholangiography and T2-weighted MR cholangiography were recorded and compared by using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Then, consensus interpretations of both MR image sets together were performed. Intraoperative cholangiography was the reference-standard examination for 51 subjects who underwent right lobe hepatectomy. The McNemar test was used to compare the accuracies of the individual MR techniques with that of the consensus interpretation of both image sets together and to compare each technique with intraoperative cholangiography.
RESULTS: Biliary anatomy was visualized with mangafodipir trisodium enhancement in all patients. Mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced image findings agreed with findings seen at combined interpretations significantly more often than did T2-weighted image findings (in 107 [99%] vs 88 [82%] of 108 donor candidates, P < .001). Confidence was significantly higher with the mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced images than with the T2-weighted images (mean confidence score, 4.5 vs 3.4; P < .001). In the 51 candidates who underwent intraoperative cholangiography, mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced imaging correctly depicted the biliary anatomy more often than did T2-weighted imaging (in 47 [92%] vs 43 [84%] donor candidates, P = .14), whereas the two MR imaging techniques combined correctly depicted the anatomy in 48 (94%) candidates.
CONCLUSION: Mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced 3D MR cholangiography depicts intrahepatic biliary anatomy, especially right duct variants, more accurately than does conventional T2-weighted MR cholangiography. (c) RSNA, 2004.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15516606     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2333031977

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


  13 in total

1.  [Anatomy and variants of hepatic segments, vessels, and bile ducts].

Authors:  A Dirisamer; K Friedrich; W Schima
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 2.  [Comparison of 2D and 3D sequences for MRCP. Clinical value of the different techniques].

Authors:  A M Wallnoefer; K A Herrmann; U Beuers; C J Zech; S Gourtsoyianni; M F Reiser; S O Schoenberg
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 3.  Pancreatic and biliary anomalies: imaging in 2008.

Authors:  Sudha A Anupindi
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2008-05

4.  Managing injuries of hepatic duct confluence variants after major hepatobiliary surgery: an algorithmic approach.

Authors:  Georgios Fragulidis; Athanasios Marinis; Andreas Polydorou; Christos Konstantinidis; Georgios Anastasopoulos; John Contis; Dionysios Voros; Vassilios Smyrniotis
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-05-21       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Clinical usefulness of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for evaluating biliary anatomy in living donor liver transplantation.

Authors:  Sang Hyun Choi; Kyoung Won Kim; Heon-Ju Kwon; So Yeon Kim; Jae Hyun Kwon; Gi-Won Song; Sung-Gyu Lee
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-06-21       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Diagnostic value of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR cholangiography in non-invasive detection of postoperative bile leakage.

Authors:  Melahat Kul; Ayşe Erden; Ebru Düşünceli Atman
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Assessment of a postoperative anastomotic stricture following correction surgery of a type IVa choledochal cyst using Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced magnetic resonance cholangiography.

Authors:  Evangelos Perdikakis; Evangelia G Chryssou; Mairi Koulentaki; Elias Kouroumalis; Apostolos Karantanas
Journal:  Clin J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-11-01

8.  Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in assessing living liver donors biliary anatomy: opportunities and challenges.

Authors:  Rossano Girometti; Umberto Baccarani
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 7.293

9.  Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with GRASE sequence at 3.0T: does it improve image quality and acquisition time as compared with 3D TSE?

Authors:  Morikatsu Yoshida; Takeshi Nakaura; Taihei Inoue; Shota Tanoue; Sentaro Takada; Daisuke Utsunomiya; Shota Tsumagari; Kazunori Harada; Yasuyuki Yamashita
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-01-15       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Contrast-enhanced MR cholangiography with Gd-EOB-DTPA in patients with liver cirrhosis: visualization of the biliary ducts in comparison with patients with normal liver parenchyma.

Authors:  Frank T C Tschirch; Anja Struwe; Henrik Petrowsky; Irini Kakales; Borut Marincek; Dominik Weishaupt
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-03-28       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.