Literature DB >> 23538889

Comparison of magnetic resonance elastography and gadoxetate disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of hepatic fibrosis.

Ye Ra Choi1, Jeong Min Lee, Jeong Hee Yoon, Joon Koo Han, Byung Ihn Choi.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) and gadoxetate disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the staging of hepatic fibrosis (HF) in patients with liver diseases.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study was approved by our institutional review board, and the informed consent was waived. One hundred and sixty-eight patients with chronic liver disease or suspected focal hepatic lesions underwent MRE and gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI at 1.5 T. Liver stiffness values were measured on quantitative shear-stiffness maps. The contrast enhancement index (CEI) was calculated as SIpost / SIpre, where SIpost and SIpre are, respectively, the liver-to-muscle signal intensity (SI) ratio on hepatobiliary phase images and on unenhanced images. The diagnostic performance of MRE and CEI for staging HF was compared using the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis on the basis of the histopathologic analysis of HF.
RESULTS: The liver stiffness values measured on MRE (r = 0.802; P < 0.0001) were more strongly correlated with the HF stage than with the CEI (r = -0.378; P < 0.0001). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve values of the liver stiffness values were significantly larger than those of CEI were for discriminating all stages of HF (P < 0.001 for ≥ F1, ≥ F2, ≥ F3, and ≥ F4). Magnetic resonance elastography showed higher sensitivity and specificity for predicting HF ≥ F1 (91% and 87%), ≥ F2 (87% and 91%), ≥ F3 (80% and 89%), and F4 (81% and 85%) compared with CEI (46% and 85%, 46% and 82%, 63% and 68%, and 76% and 65%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance elastography was superior to the gadoxetate disodium-enhancement MRI for HF staging.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23538889     DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e318289ff8f

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


  18 in total

Review 1.  Magnetic resonance elastography for staging liver fibrosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a diagnostic accuracy systematic review and individual participant data pooled analysis.

Authors:  Siddharth Singh; Sudhakar K Venkatesh; Rohit Loomba; Zhen Wang; Claude Sirlin; Jun Chen; Meng Yin; Frank H Miller; Russell N Low; Tarek Hassanein; Edmund M Godfrey; Patrick Asbach; Mohammad Hassan Murad; David J Lomas; Jayant A Talwalkar; Richard L Ehman
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Can functional parameters from hepatobiliary phase of gadoxetate MRI predict clinical outcomes in patients with cirrhosis?

Authors:  Kumar Sandrasegaran; Enming Cui; Reem Elkady; Pauley Gasparis; Gitasree Borthakur; Mark Tann; Suthat Liangpunsakul
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and MR elastography in staging liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Weon Jang; Seongil Jo; Ji Soo Song; Hong Pil Hwang; Seong-Hun Kim
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-03-26

Review 4.  Evaluation of hepatic fibrosis: a review from the society of abdominal radiology disease focus panel.

Authors:  Jeanne M Horowitz; Sudhakar K Venkatesh; Richard L Ehman; Kartik Jhaveri; Patrick Kamath; Michael A Ohliger; Anthony E Samir; Alvin C Silva; Bachir Taouli; Michael S Torbenson; Michael L Wells; Benjamin Yeh; Frank H Miller
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2017-08

Review 5.  Comparison of gradient-recalled echo and spin-echo echo-planar imaging MR elastography in staging liver fibrosis: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yong Seek Kim; Yu Na Jang; Ji Soo Song
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-11-21       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Effect of breath holding at the end of the inspiration and expiration phases on liver stiffness measured by 2D-MR elastography.

Authors:  Hao Ren; Dawei Yang; Hui Xu; Kai Pang; Yiwen Shi; Qiushuang Guan; Zhenghan Yang
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-01-02

Review 7.  Imaging of Hepatic Fibrosis.

Authors:  Rishi Philip Mathew; Sudhakar Kundapur Venkatesh
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2018-08-29

Review 8.  Noninvasive diagnosis of cirrhosis: a review of different imaging modalities.

Authors:  Riccardo De Robertis; Mirko D'Onofrio; Emanuele Demozzi; Stefano Crosara; Stefano Canestrini; Roberto Pozzi Mucelli
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-06-21       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  Primary biliary cirrhosis degree assessment by acoustic radiation force impulse imaging and hepatic fibrosis indicators.

Authors:  Hai-Chun Zhang; Rong-Fei Hu; Ting Zhu; Ling Tong; Qiu-Qin Zhang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-06-14       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Feasibility of histogram analysis of susceptibility-weighted MRI for staging of liver fibrosis.

Authors:  Zhao Xia Yang; He Yue Liang; Xin Xing Hu; Ya Qin Huang; Ying Ding; Shan Yang; Meng Su Zeng; Sheng Xiang Rao
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.630

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.