OBJECTIVE: To compare diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for the detection and characterisation of focal liver lesions (FLLs) in patients with colorectal carcinoma. METHODS: Seventy-three patients underwent MR imaging including echoplanar DWI (MR-DWI) and dynamic (MR-Dyn) and hepatobiliary phase (MR-Late) Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced images. Two blinded readers independently reviewed 5 different image sets using a 5-point confidence scale. Accuracy was assessed by the area (A(z)) under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and sensitivity and specificity were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 332 FLLs were evaluated. Detection rates were significantly higher for MR-Late images (94.4% for benign and 100% for malignant lesions) compared with MR-DWI (78.3% and 97.5%) and MR-Dyn images (81.5% and 89.9%). Accuracy was 0.82, 0.76 and 0.89 for MR-DWI, MR-Dyn and MR-Late images while sensitivity was 0.98, 0.87 and 0.95, respectively. For characterisation of subcentimetre lesions sensitivity was highest for MR-DWI (0.92). Combined reading of unenhanced and contrast-enhanced images had an identical high accuracy of 0.98. CONCLUSION: Late-phase Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced images were superior for the detection of FLLs, while DWIs were most valuable for the identification of particularly small metastases. Combined interpretation of unenhanced images resulted in precise characterisation of FLLs.
OBJECTIVE: To compare diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for the detection and characterisation of focal liver lesions (FLLs) in patients with colorectal carcinoma. METHODS: Seventy-three patients underwent MR imaging including echoplanar DWI (MR-DWI) and dynamic (MR-Dyn) and hepatobiliary phase (MR-Late) Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced images. Two blinded readers independently reviewed 5 different image sets using a 5-point confidence scale. Accuracy was assessed by the area (A(z)) under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and sensitivity and specificity were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 332 FLLs were evaluated. Detection rates were significantly higher for MR-Late images (94.4% for benign and 100% for malignant lesions) compared with MR-DWI (78.3% and 97.5%) and MR-Dyn images (81.5% and 89.9%). Accuracy was 0.82, 0.76 and 0.89 for MR-DWI, MR-Dyn and MR-Late images while sensitivity was 0.98, 0.87 and 0.95, respectively. For characterisation of subcentimetre lesions sensitivity was highest for MR-DWI (0.92). Combined reading of unenhanced and contrast-enhanced images had an identical high accuracy of 0.98. CONCLUSION: Late-phase Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced images were superior for the detection of FLLs, while DWIs were most valuable for the identification of particularly small metastases. Combined interpretation of unenhanced images resulted in precise characterisation of FLLs.
Authors: Andrew D Hardie; Mohit Naik; Elizabeth M Hecht; Hersh Chandarana; Lorenzo Mannelli; James S Babb; Bachir Taouli Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2010-02-11 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Sook Namkung; Christoph J Zech; Thomas Helmberger; Maximilian F Reiser; Stefan O Schoenberg Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Tejas Parikh; Stephen J Drew; Vivian S Lee; Samson Wong; Elizabeth M Hecht; James S Babb; Bachir Taouli Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-01-25 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Alexander Huppertz; Thomas Balzer; Anthony Blakeborough; Josy Breuer; Andrea Giovagnoni; Gertraud Heinz-Peer; Michael Laniado; Riccardo M Manfredi; Didier G Mathieu; Dieter Mueller; Peter Reimer; Philip J Robinson; Michael Strotzer; Matthias Taupitz; Thomas J Vogl Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Eduardo A C Costa; Guilherme M Cunha; Emmanuil Smorodinsky; Irene Cruite; An Tang; Robert M Marks; Lisa Clark; Tanya Wolfson; Anthony Gamst; Jason K Sicklick; Alan Hemming; Michael R Peterson; Michael S Middleton; Claude B Sirlin Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-04-15 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Francesco Mungai; Filippo Pasquinelli; Lorenzo Nicola Mazzoni; Gianni Virgili; Alfonso Ragozzino; Emilio Quaia; Giovanni Morana; Andrea Giovagnoni; Luigi Grazioli; Stefano Colagrande Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2014-01-10 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Stefano Palmucci; Letizia Antonella Mauro; Martina Messina; Brunella Russo; Giovanni Failla; Pietro Milone; Massimiliano Berretta; Giovanni Carlo Ettorre Journal: World J Radiol Date: 2012-07-28
Authors: Lisa A Min; Wouter V Vogel; Max J Lahaye; Monique Maas; Maarten L Donswijk; Erik Vegt; Miranda Kusters; Henry J Zijlmans; Katarzyna Jóźwiak; Sander Roberti; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Doenja M J Lambregts Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-05-22 Impact factor: 5.315