Literature DB >> 32562201

Influence of injection rate in determining the development of artifacts during the acquisition of dynamic arterial phase in Gd-EOB-DTPA MRI studies.

Davide Ippolito1, Cesare Maino2, Anna Pecorelli2, Luca Riva2, Giulia Querques2, Cammillo Talei Franzesi2, Sandro Sironi3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether different Gd-EOB-DTPA injection rates could influence the development of artifacts during the arterial phase of liver MRI studies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All Gd-EOB-DTPA liver MRI studies performed for different clinical indications at a single tertiary referral center were retrospectively evaluated. Each examination was acquired on a 1.5 T scanner with T1 In- and Out-of-Phase, T2 with and without fat-saturation, DWI, and 3D-T1 fat-sat dynamic sequences. Patients were divided into two groups according to the injection rate (1 ml/s and 1.5 ml/s). A single radiologist recorded the presence or absence of artifacts during different acquisition phases, respectively: (1) all examination; (2) only during the arterial phase; (3) only during the portal-venous phase; (4) both in arterial and portal-venous phases. From a total of 748 MRI studies performed, 229 were excluded due to the presence of artifacts during the entire examination. The remaining 519 MRI studies were divided into two groups according to the injection rate.
RESULTS: The first group (flow rate = 1 ml/s) was composed by 312 (60.1%) patients and the second group (flow rate = 1.5 ml/s) by 207 (39.9%) patients. In the first group, 2 (0.6%) patients showed artifacts in all dynamic sequences; 13 (4%) only in the arterial phase, 16 (5%) only in the portal-venous phase, and 38 (12%) both in arterial and portal-venous phases; a total of 243 (78%) showed no artifacts. In the second group, 3 (1.5%) patients had artifacts in all dynamic sequences, 82 (40%) only in the arterial phase, 20 (10%) only in the portal-venous phase, and 53 (25%) both in arterial and portal-venous phases; a total of 49 (23.5%) showed no artifacts. A significant difference between the two groups regarding the absence of artifacts in all examination and the presence of artifacts only during the arterial phase was found (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The development of artifacts during the arterial phase of Gd-EOB-DTPA liver MRI studies could be related to the injection rate and its reduction may help to decrease the incidence of artifacts.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Gadoxetic acid-DTPA (Gd-EOB-DTPA); Injection rate; Liver; Magnetic resonance imaging

Year:  2020        PMID: 32562201     DOI: 10.1007/s10334-020-00857-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  MAGMA        ISSN: 0968-5243            Impact factor:   2.310


  11 in total

Review 1.  Gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI of the liver: part 1, protocol optimization and lesion appearance in the noncirrhotic liver.

Authors:  Kristina I Ringe; Daniela B Husarik; Claude B Sirlin; Elmar M Merkle
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Effects of k-space filtering and image interpolation on image fidelity in (1)H MRSI.

Authors:  B Vikhoff-Baaz; G Starck; M Ljungberg; K Lagerstrand; E Forssell-Aronsson; S Ekholm
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 2.546

Review 3.  Body MR Imaging: Artifacts, k-Space, and Solutions.

Authors:  Susie Y Huang; Ravi T Seethamraju; Pritesh Patel; Peter F Hahn; John E Kirsch; Alexander R Guimaraes
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2015-07-24       Impact factor: 5.333

4.  Noise and filtration in magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  E R McVeigh; R M Henkelman; M J Bronskill
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1985 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Hepatic uptake of the magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent gadoxetate by the organic anion transporting polypeptide Oatp1.

Authors:  J E van Montfoort; B Stieger; D K Meijer; H J Weinmann; P J Meier; K E Fattinger
Journal:  J Pharmacol Exp Ther       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 4.030

6.  Comparison of three different injection methods for arterial phase of Gd-EOB-DTPA enhanced MR imaging of the liver.

Authors:  Tsutomu Tamada; Katsuyoshi Ito; Koji Yoshida; Akihiko Kanki; Atsushi Higaki; Daigo Tanimoto; Hiroki Higashi
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2011-02-05       Impact factor: 3.528

7.  ESGAR consensus statement on liver MR imaging and clinical use of liver-specific contrast agents.

Authors:  E Neri; M A Bali; A Ba-Ssalamah; P Boraschi; G Brancatelli; F Caseiro Alves; L Grazioli; T Helmberger; J M Lee; R Manfredi; L Martì-Bonmatì; C Matos; E M Merkle; B Op De Beeck; W Schima; S Skehan; V Vilgrain; C Zech; C Bartolozzi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-07-21       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Triple Arterial Phase MR Imaging with Gadoxetic Acid Using a Combination of Contrast Enhanced Time Robust Angiography, Keyhole, and Viewsharing Techniques and Two-Dimensional Parallel Imaging in Comparison with Conventional Single Arterial Phase.

Authors:  Jeong Hee Yoon; Jeong Min Lee; Mi Hye Yu; Eun Ju Kim; Joon Koo Han
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2016-06-27       Impact factor: 3.500

9.  Suppression of MRI truncation artifacts using total variation constrained data extrapolation.

Authors:  Kai Tobias Block; Martin Uecker; Jens Frahm
Journal:  Int J Biomed Imaging       Date:  2008
View more
  2 in total

1.  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

2.  Accuracy of Inflow Inversion Recovery (IFIR) for Upper Abdominal Arteries Evaluation: Comparison with Contrast-Enhanced MR and CTA.

Authors:  Roberto Simonini; Pietro Andrea Bonaffini; Marco Porta; Cesare Maino; Francesco Saverio Carbone; Ludovico Dulcetta; Paolo Brambilla; Paolo Marra; Sandro Sironi
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-28
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.