Literature DB >> 16428988

Superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of 1.5 T and 3.0 T imaging for detection of focal malignant liver lesions.

Jung Min Chang1, Jeong Min Lee, Min Woo Lee, Jin Young Choi, Se Hyung Kim, Jae Young Lee, Joon Koo Han, Byung Ihn Choi.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare the image quality, lesion conspicuity, and the diagnostic performance of 1.5 T and 3.0 T superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for detecting focal malignant hepatic lesions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 35 patients with pathologically proven liver malignancy underwent both 1.5 and 3.0 T SPIO-enhanced MRI. The diagnostic accuracy was evaluated using the alternative-free response receiver operating characteristic method. Image artifacts, quality, and the lesion conspicuity were analyzed. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of the lesion were calculated.
RESULTS: No significant difference of area under ROC curve (Az value) was noted. The mean SNR and CNR of the lesions was higher in the 3.0 T sets. There was no difference between the 1.5 T and the 3.0 T image sets for lesion conspicuity, but the image quality was better on 1.5 T. Motion and susceptibility artifacts were more frequent on 3.0 T.
CONCLUSION: Diagnostic accuracies of the SPIO-enhanced MRI were equivalent on the 1.5 T and 3.0 T image sets. More prominent artifacts on 3.0 T superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced liver MRI counteracted advantage of higher SNR and CNR of 3.0 T.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16428988     DOI: 10.1097/01.rli.0000192417.33989.7a

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Radiol        ISSN: 0020-9996            Impact factor:   6.016


  6 in total

1.  3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging: A new standard in liver imaging?

Authors:  Rossano Girometti
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2015-07-28

2.  Detection of hepatic metastases by superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced MR imaging: prospective comparison between 1.5-T and 3.0-T images in the same patients.

Authors:  Keitaro Sofue; Masakatsu Tsurusaki; Mototaka Miyake; Aine Sakurada; Yasuaki Arai; Kazuro Sugimura
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-04-29       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Gadoxetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced MRI versus gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA)-enhanced MRI for preoperatively detecting hepatocellular carcinoma: an initial experience.

Authors:  Yulri Park; Seong Hyun Kim; Seung Hoon Kim; Yong Hwan Jeon; Jongmee Lee; Min Ju Kim; Dongil Choi; Won Jae Lee; Heejung Kim; Ji Hyun Koo; Hyo Keun Lim
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2010-06-21       Impact factor: 3.500

4.  ESGAR consensus statement on liver MR imaging and clinical use of liver-specific contrast agents.

Authors:  E Neri; M A Bali; A Ba-Ssalamah; P Boraschi; G Brancatelli; F Caseiro Alves; L Grazioli; T Helmberger; J M Lee; R Manfredi; L Martì-Bonmatì; C Matos; E M Merkle; B Op De Beeck; W Schima; S Skehan; V Vilgrain; C Zech; C Bartolozzi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-07-21       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  SPIO-enhanced MRI findings of well-differentiated hepatocellular carcinomas: correlation with MDCT findings.

Authors:  Seong Hyun Kim; Won Jae Lee; Hyo K Lim; Cheol Keun Park
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2009-03-03       Impact factor: 3.500

6.  Morphological Analysis of Reticuloendothelial System in Capuchin Monkeys (Sapajus spp.) after Meso-2,3-Dimercaptosuccinic Acid (DMSA) Coated Magnetic Nanoparticles Administration.

Authors:  Shélida Vasconcelos Braz; Victoria Monge-Fuentes; Jaqueline Rodrigues da Silva; Carlos Tomaz; Maria Clotilde Tavares; Monica Pereira Garcia; Sônia Nair Báo; Silene Paulino Lozzi; Ricardo Bentes de Azevedo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.