OBJECTIVES: To compare diagnostic performance in the detection of colorectal liver metastases between 64-detector-row contrast-enhanced CT (CE-CT) alone and the combination of CE-CT and gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI (EOB-MRI) at 3.0T, and to assess whether EOB-MRI in addition to CE-CT results in a change to initially planned operative strategy. METHODS: A total of 39 patients (27 men, mean age 65 years) with 85 histopathologically confirmed liver metastases were included. At EOB-MRI, unenhanced (T1- and T2-weighted), dynamic, and hepatocyte-phase images were obtained. At CE-CT, four-phase dynamic contrast-enhanced images were obtained. One on-site reader and three off-site readers independently reviewed both CE-CT alone and the combination of CE-CT and EOB-MRI. Sensitivity, positive predictive value, and alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic (AFROC) method were calculated. Differences in therapeutic strategy before and after the EOB-MRI examination were also evaluated. RESULTS: Sensitivity and area under the AFROC curve with the combination of CE-CT and EOB-MRI were significantly superior to those with CE-CT alone. Changes in surgical therapy were documented in 13 of 39 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of CE-CT and EOB-MRI may provide better diagnostic performance than CE-CT alone for the detection of colorectal liver metastases, and EOB-MRI in addition to CE-CT resulted in changes to the planned operative strategy in one-third of the patients. KEY POINTS: • Accurate preoperative imaging is essential for surgical planning and successful hepatic resection. • Combination of CE-CT and EOB-MRI is useful to detect colorectal liver metastases. • EOB-MRI combined with CE-CT contributes to determine the correct therapeutic strategy.
OBJECTIVES: To compare diagnostic performance in the detection of colorectal liver metastases between 64-detector-row contrast-enhanced CT (CE-CT) alone and the combination of CE-CT and gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI (EOB-MRI) at 3.0T, and to assess whether EOB-MRI in addition to CE-CT results in a change to initially planned operative strategy. METHODS: A total of 39 patients (27 men, mean age 65 years) with 85 histopathologically confirmed liver metastases were included. At EOB-MRI, unenhanced (T1- and T2-weighted), dynamic, and hepatocyte-phase images were obtained. At CE-CT, four-phase dynamic contrast-enhanced images were obtained. One on-site reader and three off-site readers independently reviewed both CE-CT alone and the combination of CE-CT and EOB-MRI. Sensitivity, positive predictive value, and alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic (AFROC) method were calculated. Differences in therapeutic strategy before and after the EOB-MRI examination were also evaluated. RESULTS: Sensitivity and area under the AFROC curve with the combination of CE-CT and EOB-MRI were significantly superior to those with CE-CT alone. Changes in surgical therapy were documented in 13 of 39 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of CE-CT and EOB-MRI may provide better diagnostic performance than CE-CT alone for the detection of colorectal liver metastases, and EOB-MRI in addition to CE-CT resulted in changes to the planned operative strategy in one-third of the patients. KEY POINTS: • Accurate preoperative imaging is essential for surgical planning and successful hepatic resection. • Combination of CE-CT and EOB-MRI is useful to detect colorectal liver metastases. • EOB-MRI combined with CE-CT contributes to determine the correct therapeutic strategy.
Authors: Chusilp Charnsangavej; Bryan Clary; Yuman Fong; Axel Grothey; Timothy M Pawlik; Michael A Choti Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2006-09-01 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Marcus M von Falkenhausen; Götz Lutterbey; Nuschin Morakkabati-Spitz; Oliver Walter; Jürgen Gieseke; Renate Blömer; Winfried A Willinek; Hans H Schild; Christiane K Kuhl Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-08-14 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Renate Hammerstingl; Alexander Huppertz; Josy Breuer; Thomas Balzer; Anthony Blakeborough; Rick Carter; Lluis Castells Fusté; Gertraud Heinz-Peer; Werner Judmaier; Michael Laniado; Riccardo M Manfredi; Didier G Mathieu; Dieter Müller; Koenraad Mortelè; Peter Reimer; Maximilian F Reiser; Philip J Robinson; Kohkan Shamsi; Michael Strotzer; Matthias Taupitz; Bernd Tombach; Gianluca Valeri; Bernhard E van Beers; Thomas J Vogl Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2007-12-06 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Christoph J Zech; Nahila Justo; Andrea Lang; Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah; Myeong-Jin Kim; Harald Rinde; Eduard Jonas Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-02-24 Impact factor: 5.315