Literature DB >> 8061428

Solitary hepatic metastasis: comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced CT and MR imaging with fat-suppressed T2-weighted, breath-hold T1-weighted FLASH, and dynamic gadolinium-enhanced FLASH sequences.

R C Semelka1, J P Shoenut, S M Ascher, M A Kroeker, H M Greenberg, C S Yaffe, A B Micflikier.   

Abstract

Twenty consecutive cancer patients with a solitary hepatic metastasis detected with dynamic contrast-material-enhanced computed tomography (CT) who were considered for hepatic resection underwent magnetic resonance (MR) imaging within 18 days after CT. Histologic confirmation was obtained in all lesions. CT depicted 20 solitary lesions. MR imaging showed a solitary lesion in 14 patients, two lesions in three patients, and more than two lesions in three patients, for a total of 37 lesions. Twenty-three lesions less than 2 cm in diameter were missed with CT, and six lesions less than 1.3 cm in diameter were missed with MR imaging. MR imaging was superior to CT in the detection of hepatic metastases on a patient-by-patient basis (P < .01). The results suggest that MR imaging is superior to dynamic contrast-enhanced CT for the detection of hepatic metastases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8061428     DOI: 10.1002/jmri.1880040316

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 1053-1807            Impact factor:   4.813


  9 in total

Review 1.  Ultra-high-speed MR imaging.

Authors:  C P Davis; G C McKinnon; J F Debatin; G K von Schulthess
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Diagnostic performance of MDCT, PET/CT and gadoxetic acid (Primovist(®))-enhanced MRI in patients with colorectal liver metastases being considered for hepatic resection: initial experience in a single centre.

Authors:  V O Chan; J P Das; J F Gerstenmaier; J Geoghegan; R G Gibney; C D Collins; S J Skehan; D E Malone
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2012-03-17       Impact factor: 1.568

Review 3.  Imaging diagnosis of colorectal liver metastases.

Authors:  Ling-Hui Xu; San-Jun Cai; Guo-Xiang Cai; Wei-Jun Peng
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-11-14       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Diagnostic efficacy of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for the detection and characterisation of liver metastases: comparison with multidetector-row CT.

Authors:  Y K Kim; G Park; C S Kim; H C Yu; Y M Han
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Detection and characterization of liver metastases: 16-slice multidetector computed tomography versus superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Young Kon Kim; Seog Wan Ko; Seung Bae Hwang; Chong Soo Kim; Hee Chul Yu
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-02-02       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of colorectal liver metastases.

Authors:  S Blyth; A Blakeborough; M Peterson; I C Cameron; A W Majeed
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 1.891

7.  Detection of colorectal liver metastases: a prospective multicenter trial comparing unenhanced MRI, MnDPDP-enhanced MRI, and spiral CT.

Authors:  Carlo Bartolozzi; Francescamaria Donati; Dania Cioni; Carlo Procacci; Giovanni Morana; Antonio Chiesa; Luigi Grazioli; Giorgio Cittadini; Giuseppe Cittadini; Andrea Giovagnoni; Giovanni Gandini; Jochen Maass; Riccardo Lencioni
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2003-08-09       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Detection of colorectal liver metastases: prospective comparison of unenhanced and ferumoxides-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 T, dual-phase spiral CT, and spiral CT during arterial portography.

Authors:  R Lencioni; F Donati; D Cioni; A Paolicchi; A Cicorelli; C Bartolozzi
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 2.310

Review 9.  Colorectal liver metastases.

Authors:  D Burke; T G Allen-Mersh
Journal:  Postgrad Med J       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 2.401

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.