Literature DB >> 30323881

Gd-EOB-DTPA DCE-MRI biomarkers in a rabbit model of liver fibrosis.

Yang Ji1, Chuanshan Zhang2, Zhe Huang3, Xia Wang3, Lina Yue4, Meimei Gao4, Huiling Hu4, Qinjun Su5, Yuedong Han3,4, Bin Liu5, Ding Yang6, Zhanliang Su7, Zhuoli Zhang7.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the correlations between Gd-EOB-DTPA DCE-MRI biomarkers and histopathologic biomarkers of liver fibrosis progression in a rabbit model of liver fibrosis. Thirty-Six New Zealand white rabbits were randomly divided into control (n = 6) and liver fibrosis group (n = 30). Each rabbit in the liver fibrosis group received a weekly subcutaneous injection in the back comprising 50% carbon tetrachloride (CCl4) in oily solution. Control rabbits received subcutaneous injections with the same amount of normal saline solution instead. MR imaging was performed in control and fibrotic rabbits were conducted by MRI at week 0 (n = 36). The fibrotic rabbits were performed MR imaging on 6 weeks, 9 weeks, and 12 weeks after modeling of fibrosis. Before each MRI, peripheral blood was collected, and several biochemical testes are performed. The thirty-four rabbits completed this study. They were then divided into three subgroups according to fibrotic stage: no fibrosis (F0, n = 12), mild fibrosis (F1+F2, n = 14), and advanced fibrosis (F3+F4, n = 8). DCE-MRI measurements show increasing Ktrans and Ve while decreasing iACU90 with increasing fibrosis stage. The significant correlations were observed between mean Ktrans, Ve, iACU90 and percentage of the animal with mild liver fibrosis. For blood biomarkers, there were significant differences between F0 and F1+F2, and between F0 and F3+F4 in the serum levels of ALT (all P < 0.05), and TB (F0 vs. F1+F2, P = 0.004), while no differences were found between F1+F2 group and F3+F4 group (all P > 0.05). There were significant differences between F0 and F1+F2 (P = 0.02). Gd-EOB-DTPA DCE-MRI is a promising method for the noninvasive diagnosis and staging of liver fibrosis. Future studies to evaluate the effectiveness of these techniques in patients with liver fibrosis are warranted.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Liver fibrosis; animal; magnetic resonance imaging; pathology

Year:  2018        PMID: 30323881      PMCID: PMC6176220     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Transl Res        ISSN: 1943-8141            Impact factor:   4.060


  23 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  DCE-MRI of the liver: effect of linear and nonlinear conversions on hepatic perfusion quantification and reproducibility.

Authors:  Shimon Aronhime; Claudia Calcagno; Guido H Jajamovich; Hadrien Arezki Dyvorne; Philip Robson; Douglas Dieterich; M Isabel Fiel; Valérie Martel-Laferriere; Manjil Chatterji; Henry Rusinek; Bachir Taouli
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2013-11-04       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 3.  Prospects in non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis: Liquid biopsy as the future gold standard?

Authors:  Joeri Lambrecht; Stefaan Verhulst; Inge Mannaerts; Hendrik Reynaert; Leo A van Grunsven
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Basis Dis       Date:  2018-01-09       Impact factor: 5.187

4.  Magnetic resonance elastography in a rabbit model of liver fibrosis: a 3-T longitudinal validation for clinical translation.

Authors:  Liqiu Zou; Jinzhao Jiang; Wenxin Zhong; Chunrong Wang; Wei Xing; Zhuoli Zhang
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 4.060

Review 5.  Comparison of laboratory tests, ultrasound, or magnetic resonance elastography to detect fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Guangqin Xiao; Sixian Zhu; Xiao Xiao; Lunan Yan; Jiayin Yang; Gang Wu
Journal:  Hepatology       Date:  2017-09-26       Impact factor: 17.425

6.  Predictive value of ALT levels for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and advanced fibrosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

Authors:  Siddharth Verma; Donald Jensen; John Hart; Smruti R Mohanty
Journal:  Liver Int       Date:  2013-06-13       Impact factor: 5.828

Review 7.  Liver pathology of hepatitis C, beyond grading and staging of the disease.

Authors:  Sadhna Dhingra; Stephen C Ward; Swan N Thung
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Carbogen gas-challenge blood oxygen level-dependent magnetic resonance imaging in hepatocellular carcinoma: Initial results.

Authors:  Long Jiang Zhang; Zhuoli Zhang; Jian Xu; Ning Jin; Song Luo; Andrew C Larson; Guang Ming Lu
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2015-07-23       Impact factor: 2.967

9.  Baseline NS5A resistance associated substitutions may impair DAA response in real-world hepatitis C patients.

Authors:  Itzíar Carrasco; Ana Arias; Laura Benítez-Gutiérrez; Gemma Lledó; Silvia Requena; Miriam Cuesta; Valentín Cuervas-Mons; Carmen de Mendoza
Journal:  J Med Virol       Date:  2017-11-03       Impact factor: 2.327

Review 10.  Magnetic Resonance Elastography and Other Magnetic Resonance Imaging Techniques in Chronic Liver Disease: Current Status and Future Directions.

Authors:  Cher Heng Tan; Sudhakar Kundapur Venkatesh
Journal:  Gut Liver       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 4.519

View more
  1 in total

1.  Multiparameter magnetic resonance imaging of liver fibrosis in a bile duct ligation mouse model.

Authors:  Jia-Yi Liu; Zhu-Yuan Ding; Zi-Yi Zhou; Sheng-Zhen Dai; Jie Zhang; Hao Li; Qiu Du; Ye-Yu Cai; Quan-Liang Shang; Yong-Heng Luo; En-Hua Xiao
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-12-21       Impact factor: 5.742

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.