Literature DB >> 8345781

Comparison between Gd-DTPA, Gd-EOB-DTPA, and Mn-DPDP in induced HCC in rats: a correlation study of MR imaging, microangiography, and histology.

G Marchal1, X Zhang, Y Ni, P Van Hecke, J Yu, A L Baert.   

Abstract

The behaviour of two liver-specific contrast MR agents, Gd-EOB-DTPA and Mn-DPDP and one nonspecific contrast agent, Gd-DTPA, was compared in a rat model of chemically induced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The study included contrast enhanced MR imaging and the corresponding microangiography and histology. Analysis of the MR images showed similar degrees of maximum relative liver enhancement: 47.5 +/- 8.2% for Gd-EOB-DTPA (0.03 mmol/kg) at 5 min postinjection and 52.5 +/- 14.4% for Mn-DPDP (0.025 mmol/kg) at 15 min; both exceeded the value obtained with Gd-DTPA (34.8 +/- 13.6%, at 5 min), even at 0.3 mmol/kg. Gd-EOB-DTPA caused a similar "negative" enhancement of all types of HCC, independent of their differentiation and vascularization, i.e., lesion-to-liver contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of differentiated and undifferentiated HCC increased negatively from, respectively, 1.9 +/- 1.1 and -5.1 +/- 3.1 before contrast to -5.2 +/- 2.4 and -11.8 +/- 4.8 at 5 min after contrast. On Mn-DPDP enhanced images, the undifferentiated HCCs showed up negatively (CNR -5.5 +/- 4.7 before contrast to -13.7 +/- 10 at 15 min after contrast), whereas the more differentiated tumors showed up positively (CNR from 2.3 +/- 2.0 before contrast to 12.5 +/- 3.5 at 24 hr postcontrast) due to active uptake and delayed elimination of Mn-DPDP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8345781     DOI: 10.1016/0730-725x(93)90008-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 0730-725X            Impact factor:   2.546


  6 in total

Review 1.  [Current status of MRI diagnostics with liver-specific contrast agents. Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-BOPTA].

Authors:  C Stroszczynski; G Gaffke; M Gnauck; F Streitparth; G Wieners; E Lopez-Häninnen
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 2.  Appearance of hepatocellular carcinoma on gadoxetic acid-enhanced hepato-biliary phase MR imaging: a systematic review.

Authors:  Paola Erra; Marta Puglia; Alfonso Ragozzino; Simone Maurea; Raffaele Liuzzi; Giuseppe Sabino; Luigi Barbuto; Alberto Cuocolo; Massimo Imbriaco
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 3.469

3.  A pH-activatable nanoparticle with signal-amplification capabilities for non-invasive imaging of tumour malignancy.

Authors:  Peng Mi; Daisuke Kokuryo; Horacio Cabral; Hailiang Wu; Yasuko Terada; Tsuneo Saga; Ichio Aoki; Nobuhiro Nishiyama; Kazunori Kataoka
Journal:  Nat Nanotechnol       Date:  2016-05-16       Impact factor: 39.213

4.  Effect of lapatinib on hepatic parenchymal enhancement on gadoxetate disodium (EOB)-enhanced MRI scans of the rat liver.

Authors:  Yuko Nakamura; Yutaka Hirokawa; Shigemi Kitamura; Wataru Yamasaki; Koji Arihiro; Fuminari Tatsugami; Makoto Iida; Hideaki Kakizawa; Shuji Date; Kazuo Awai
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2013-04-19       Impact factor: 2.374

Review 5.  Hepatobiliary contrast agents for contrast-enhanced MRI of the liver: properties, clinical development and applications.

Authors:  Peter Reimer; Günter Schneider; Wolfgang Schima
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2004-02-25       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  Biliary and reticuloendothelial impairment in hepatocarcinogenesis: the diagnostic role of tissue-specific MR contrast media.

Authors:  Carlo Bartolozzi; Laura Crocetti; Riccardo Lencioni; Dania Cioni; Clotilde Della Pina; Daniela Campani
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2007-02-16       Impact factor: 7.034

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.