OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety of gadoxetic acid disodium (Gd-EOB-DTPA) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and its efficacy in characterizing liver lesions. METHODS: Lesion characterization and classification using combined (unenhanced and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced) MRI were compared with those using unenhanced MRI and contrast-enhanced spiral computed tomography (CT) using on-site clinical and off-site blinded evaluations for patients with focal liver lesions. RESULTS: Gadoxetic acid disodium was well tolerated in this study. For the clinical evaluation, more lesions were correctly characterized using combined (unenhanced and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced) MRI than using unenhanced MRI and spiral CT (96% vs 84% and 85%, respectively; P < or = 0.0008). For the blinded evaluation, more lesions were correctly characterized using combined MRI compared with using unenhanced MRI (61%-76% vs 48%-65%, respectively; P < or = 0.0012 for 2/3 readers); when compared with spiral CT, a similar proportion of lesions were correctly characterized. CONCLUSIONS: Gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced MRI is of clinical benefit relative to unenhanced MRI and spiral CT for a radiological diagnosis of liver lesions.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety of gadoxetic acid disodium (Gd-EOB-DTPA) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and its efficacy in characterizing liver lesions. METHODS: Lesion characterization and classification using combined (unenhanced and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced) MRI were compared with those using unenhanced MRI and contrast-enhanced spiral computed tomography (CT) using on-site clinical and off-site blinded evaluations for patients with focal liver lesions. RESULTS:Gadoxetic acid disodium was well tolerated in this study. For the clinical evaluation, more lesions were correctly characterized using combined (unenhanced and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced) MRI than using unenhanced MRI and spiral CT (96% vs 84% and 85%, respectively; P < or = 0.0008). For the blinded evaluation, more lesions were correctly characterized using combined MRI compared with using unenhanced MRI (61%-76% vs 48%-65%, respectively; P < or = 0.0012 for 2/3 readers); when compared with spiral CT, a similar proportion of lesions were correctly characterized. CONCLUSIONS:Gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced MRI is of clinical benefit relative to unenhanced MRI and spiral CT for a radiological diagnosis of liver lesions.
Authors: J Petersein; A Spinazzi; A Giovagnoni; P Soyer; F Terrier; R Lencioni; C Bartolozzi; L Grazioli; A Chiesa; R Manfredi; P Marano; E L Van Persijn Van Meerten; J L Bloem; C Petre; G Marchal; A Greco; M T McNamara; A Heuck; M Reiser; M Laniado; C Claussen; H E Daldrup; E Rummeny; M A Kirchin; G Pirovano; B Hamm Journal: Radiology Date: 2000-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: B Hamm; T Staks; A Mühler; M Bollow; M Taupitz; T Frenzel; K J Wolf; H J Weinmann; L Lange Journal: Radiology Date: 1995-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: W S Whitney; R J Herfkens; R B Jeffrey; C H McDonnell; K C Li; W J Van Dalsem; R N Low; I R Francis; J F Dabatin; G M Glazer Journal: Radiology Date: 1993-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: D G Mitchell; S Saini; J Weinreb; E E De Lange; V M Runge; J E Kuhlman; Y Parisky; C D Johnson; J J Brown; M Schnall Journal: Radiology Date: 1994-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: P R Ros; P C Freeny; S E Harms; S E Seltzer; P L Davis; T W Chan; A E Stillman; L R Muroff; V M Runge; M A Nissenbaum Journal: Radiology Date: 1995-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: B Hamm; R F Thoeni; R G Gould; M E Bernardino; M Lüning; S Saini; A E Mahfouz; M Taupitz; K J Wolf Journal: Radiology Date: 1994-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: P Reimer; E J Rummeny; K Shamsi; T Balzer; H E Daldrup; B Tombach; T Hesse; T Berns; P E Peters Journal: Radiology Date: 1996-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Alex Frydrychowicz; Scott K Nagle; Sharon L D'Souza; Karl K Vigen; Scott B Reeder Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2011-07-12 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Julian A Luetkens; Patrick A Kupczyk; Jonas Doerner; Rolf Fimmers; Winfried A Willinek; Hans H Schild; Guido M Kukuk Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-04-23 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Jesse L Courtier; Emily R Perito; Sue Rhee; Patrika Tsai; Melvin B Heyman; John D MacKenzie Journal: J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 2.839
Authors: Alex Frydrychowicz; Meghan G Lubner; Jeffrey J Brown; Elmar M Merkle; Scott K Nagle; Neil M Rofsky; Scott B Reeder Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Liliana Chiorean; Xin-Wu Cui; Andrea Tannapfel; Doris Franke; Martin Stenzel; Wojciech Kosiak; Dagmar Schreiber-Dietrich; Jörg Jüngert; Jian-Min Chang; Christoph F Dietrich Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2015-07-28 Impact factor: 5.742