Literature DB >> 16778605

Liver tumor characterization: comparison between liver-specific gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced MRI and biphasic CT--a multicenter trial.

Juha Halavaara1, Josy Breuer, Carmen Ayuso, Thomas Balzer, Marie-France Bellin, Lennart Blomqvist, Rick Carter, Luigi Grazioli, Renate Hammerstingl, Alexander Huppertz, Gregor Jung, Denis Krause, Andrea Laghi, Edward Leen, Luciano Lupatelli, Luca Marsili, Julio Martin, E Scott Pretorius, Caroline Reinhold, Michael Stiskal, Alan H Stolpen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In our multi center trial we compared the potentials of biphasic contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) and a novel tissue-specific magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast agent gadoxetic acid disodium in liver lesion characterization.
METHODS: A total of 176 patients with 252 liver lesions were analyzed. There were 104 malignant and 148 benign lesions. High-field strength (1.0 T or 1.5 T) MR systems with T1-and T2-weighted sequences were used with and without fat suppression. After gadoxetic acid disodium injection, dynamic imaging and hepatocyte phase MR imaging were performed. Biphasic with 150 mg I/kg of body weight (100-200 mL) spiral CT was also performed. Image reading consisted of on-site (by study investigators) and fully blinded off-site (by E.S.P; C.R; and A.S) evaluations. The classification (benign or malignant) and characterization (lesion type) outcomes of both techniques were assessed. All imaging results were verified against a standard of reference.
RESULTS: Both on-site and off-site evaluations demonstrated increases in the lesion classification accuracy with gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced MRI when compared with spiral CT. This improvement was also shown for characterization. Gadoxetic acid disodium was well tolerated.
CONCLUSIONS: Gadoxetic acid disodium offers a safe and diagnostically powerful tool for the evaluation of patients with focal liver lesions with a reliable assessment of lesion classification and characterization.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16778605     DOI: 10.1097/00004728-200605000-00001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr        ISSN: 0363-8715            Impact factor:   1.826


  47 in total

1.  Small (≤ 2 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic liver disease: comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0 T MRI and multiphasic 64-multirow detector CT.

Authors:  J Hwang; S H Kim; M W Lee; J Y Lee
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-12-13       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  The effect of gadoxetic acid enhancement on lesion detection and characterisation using T₂ weighted imaging and diffusion weighted imaging of the liver.

Authors:  S A Choi; S S Lee; I-H Jung; H A Kim; J H Byun; M-G Lee
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Assessment of arterial hypervascularity of hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of contrast-enhanced US and gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  Katsutoshi Sugimoto; Fuminori Moriyasu; Junji Shiraishi; Kazuhiro Saito; Junichi Taira; Toru Saguchi; Yasuharu Imai
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-01-24       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  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

5.  Health-economic evaluation of three imaging strategies in patients with suspected colorectal liver metastases: Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI vs. extracellular contrast media-enhanced MRI and 3-phase MDCT in Germany, Italy and Sweden.

Authors:  C J Zech; L Grazioli; E Jonas; M Ekman; R Niebecker; S Gschwend; J Breuer; L Jönsson; S Kienbaum
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Added value of hepatobiliary phase gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for diagnosing hepatocellular carcinoma in high-risk patients.

Authors:  Sith Phongkitkarun; Kuruwin Limsamutpetch; Penampai Tannaphai; Janjira Jatchavala
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-12-07       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 7.  Solid liver masses: approach to management from the standpoint of a radiologist.

Authors:  Robert Garrett
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2013-12

8.  Improved characterization of focal liver lesions with liver-specific gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: a multicenter phase 3 clinical trial.

Authors:  Steven S Raman; Christopher Leary; David A Bluemke; Marco Amendola; Dushyant Sahani; Jeffrey D McTavish; Jeffrey Brody; Eric Outwater; Donald Mitchell; Douglas H Sheafor; Jeff Fidler; Isaac R Francis; Richard C Semelka; Kohkan Shamsi; Simone Gschwend; David R Feldman; Josy Breuer
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2010 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.826

9.  A cost-effectiveness analysis of the diagnostic strategies for differentiating focal nodular hyperplasia from hepatocellular adenoma.

Authors:  Chong Hyun Suh; Kyung Won Kim; Seong Ho Park; Sangjin Shin; Jeonghoon Ahn; Junhee Pyo; Atul B Shinagare; Katherine M Krajewski; Nikhil H Ramaiya
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.