Literature DB >> 23024179

Optimization of the dynamic, Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI of the liver: the effect of the injection rate.

Christine Schmid-Tannwald1, Karin Herrmann, Aytekin Oto, Alexandra Panteleon, Maximilian Reiser, Christoph Zech.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Tissue-specific gadolinium-based contrast agents such as Gd-BOPTA, Gd-EOB-DTPA are increasingly used for liver imaging. Despite the added value of the hepatobiliary phase a proper arterial phase is still critical, especially in patients with chronic liver diseases. So far, there are limited data in the literature about the effect of the injection speed of Gd-EOB-DTPA in liver and vessel enhancement.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of injection rate on the enhancement of liver parenchyma and vasculature in Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced liver MRI.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eighty patients who underwent Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced liver MRI (1.5T multi-channel MR-system) were retrospectively evaluated. We used a Care Bolus technique with an injection rate of 2 mL/s in group 1 (n = 40) and a Care Bolus technique with an injection rate of 1 mL/s in group 2 (n = 40) to determine the start of the arterial-dominant phase. Signal intensities were measured in vascular structures and liver parenchyma. Signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR), SNR increase (SNRi), and percentage enhancement (PE) were calculated and compared by a students t-test.
RESULTS: The SNR, SNRi, and PE of the aorta in the arterial phase were significantly higher in group 2 in comparison to group 1 (P = 0.007, P = 0.0043, and P < 0.001, respectively). There were no significant differences concerning the SNR, SNRi, or PE of the portal vein and the normal liver parenchyma between both groups at all time points.
CONCLUSION: The study shows that a lower injection rate of 1 mL/s enables a higher enhancement in the aorta in the arterial phase compared with Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI with the more commonly used injection rate of 2 mL/s.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23024179     DOI: 10.1258/ar.2012.120186

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Radiol        ISSN: 0284-1851            Impact factor:   1.990


  12 in total

Review 1.  CT and MR imaging diagnosis and staging of hepatocellular carcinoma: part I. Development, growth, and spread: key pathologic and imaging aspects.

Authors:  Jin-Young Choi; Jeong-Min Lee; Claude B Sirlin
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  The challenges of novel contrast agents for the imaging diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Carmen Ayuso; Jordi Bruix
Journal:  Hepatol Int       Date:  2013-12-28       Impact factor: 6.047

3.  Influence of dilution on arterial-phase artifacts and signal intensity on gadoxetic acid-enhanced liver MRI.

Authors:  Sarah Poetter-Lang; Gregor O Dovjak; Alina Messner; Raphael Ambros; Stephan H Polanec; Pascal A T Baltzer; Antonia Kristic; Alexander Herold; Jacqueline C Hodge; Michael Weber; Nina Bastati; Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-07-27       Impact factor: 7.034

Review 4.  Functional MR Imaging Techniques in Oncology in the Era of Personalized Medicine.

Authors:  Matthias R Benz; Hebert Alberto Vargas; Evis Sala
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am       Date:  2015-09-26       Impact factor: 2.266

5.  Liver perfusion in dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI): comparison of enhancement in Gd-BT-DO3A and Gd-EOB-DTPA in normal liver parenchyma.

Authors:  Hanke J Schalkx; Marijn van Stralen; Kenneth Coenegrachts; Maurice A A J van den Bosch; Charlotte S van Kessel; Richard van Hillegersberg; Karel J van Erpecum; Helena M Verkooijen; Josien P W Pluim; Wouter B Veldhuis; Maarten S van Leeuwen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-07-05       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Hepatic arterial phase on gadoxetic acid-enhanced liver MR imaging: a randomized comparison of 0.5 mL/s and 1 mL/s injection rates.

Authors:  Sung Mo Kim; Suk Hee Heo; Jin Woong Kim; Hyo Soon Lim; Sang Soo Shin; Yong Yeon Jeong; Heoung Keun Kang
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2014-09-12       Impact factor: 3.500

7.  Comparison of transient severe motion in gadoxetate disodium and gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI: effect of modified breath-holding method.

Authors:  Ji Soo Song; Eun Jung Choi; Eun Hae Park; Ju-Hyung Lee
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-10-06       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Consensus report from the 7th International Forum for Liver Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Elmar M Merkle; Christoph J Zech; Carlo Bartolozzi; Mustafa R Bashir; Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah; Alexander Huppertz; Jeong Min Lee; Jens Ricke; Michiie Sakamoto; Claude B Sirlin; Sheng-Long Ye; Mengsu Zeng
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-06-13       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 9.  Troubleshooting Arterial-Phase MR Images of Gadoxetate Disodium-Enhanced Liver.

Authors:  Jimi Huh; So Yeon Kim; Benjamin M Yeh; Seung Soo Lee; Kyoung Won Kim; En-Haw Wu; Z Jane Wang; Li-qin Zhao; Wei Chou Chang
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2015-10-26       Impact factor: 3.500

10.  Optimal injection rate of ultrasound contrast agent for evaluation of focal liver lesions using an automatic power injector: a pilot study.

Authors:  Katsutoshi Sugimoto; Fuminori Moriyasu; Hirohito Takeuchi; Mayumi Kojima; Saori Ogawa; Takatomo Sano; Yoshihiro Furuichi; Yoshiyuki Kobayashi; Ikuo Nakamura
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2016-06-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.