Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Hepatobiliary-Pancreas
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of our study was to compare the diagnostic performance of 16--slice multidetector computed tomography with that of superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO)-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the detection of small hepatic metastases and in the differentiation of hepatic metastases from cysts. Twenty-three patients with 55 liver metastases and 14 liver cysts underwent SPIO-enhanced MR imaging and multiphasic CT using 16-MDCT. Two observers independently analyzed each image, in random order. Sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy for lesion detection and differentiation as metastases or cysts for MDCT and SPIO-enhanced MR imaging were calculated using receiver operating characteristic analysis. For all observers, the Az values of SPIO-enhanced MR imaging for lesion detection and differentiation of liver metastases from cysts (mean 0.955, 0.999) were higher than those of MDCT (mean 0.925, 0.982), but not statistically significantly so (P>0.05). Sensitivity of SPIO-enhanced MR imaging with regard to the detection of liver metastases (mean 94.5%) was significantly higher than that of MDCT (mean 80.0%) (P<0.05). SPIO-enhanced MR imaging and 16-MDCT showed similar diagnostic accuracies for detection and differentiation of liver metastases from cysts, but sensitivity of SPIO-enhanced imaging in the detection of liver metastases was superior to that of 16-MDCT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hagspiel KD, Neidel KFW, Eichenberger AC, Weder W, Marincek B (1995) Detection of liver metastases: comparison of superparamagnetic iron-oxide-enhanced MR imaging at 1.5 T with dynamic CT, intraoperative US, and percutaneous US. Radiology 196:471–478

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Ward J, Naik KS, Guthrie JA, Wilson D, Robinson PJ (1999) Hepatic lesion detection: comparison of MR imaging after the administration of superparamagnetic iron oxide with dual-phase CT by using alternative free response receiver operating characteristic analysis. Radiology 210:459–466

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Semelka RC, Brown ED, Ascher SM, Patt RH, Bagley AS, Li W, Edelman RR, Shoenut JP, Brown JJ (1994) 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. J Magn Reson Imaging 4:319–323

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bartolozzi C, Donati F, Cioni D, Procacci C, Morana G, Chiesa A, Grazioli L, Cittadini G, Cittadini G, Giovagnoni A, Gandini G, Maass J, Lencioni R (2004) Detection of colorectal liver metastases: a prospective multicenter trial comparing unenhanced MRI, MnDPDP-enhanced MRI, and spiral CT. Eur Radiol 14:14–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kim KW, Kim AY, Kim TK, Park SH, Kim HJ, Lee YK, Park MS, Ha HK, Kim PN, Kim JC, Lee MG (2004) Small (≤ 2 cm) hepatic lesions in colorectal cancer patients: detection and characterization on mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 182:1233–1240

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Torres CG, Lundby B, Sterud AT, McGill S, Gordon PB, Bjerknes HS (1997) MnDPDP for MR imaging of the liver: results from the European phase III studies. Acta Radiol 38:631–637

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Jones EC, Chezmar JL, Nelson RC, Bernardino ME (1992) The frequency and significance of small hepatic lesions (<15 mm) detected by CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 158:535–539

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Haider MA, Amitai MM, Rappaport DC, O’Malley ME, Hanbidge AE, Redston M, Lockwood GA, Gallinger S (2002) Multi-detector row helical CT in preoperative assessment of small (≤ 1.5 cm) liver metastases: is thinner collimation better? Radiology 225:137–142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Krakora GA, Coakley FV, Williams G, Yeh BM, Breiman RS, Qayyum A (2004) Small hypoattenuating hepatic lesions at contrast-enhanced CT: prognostic importance in patients with breast cancer. Radiology 233:667–673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tsushima K, Nishie A, Yoshimitsu K, Taketomi A, Honda H (2005) Liver metastasis with apparent intratumoral superparamagnetic iron oxide uptake. Eur Radiol 15:2203–2204

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Takahama K, Amano Y, Hayashi H, Ishihara M, Kumazaki T (2003) Detection and characterization of focal liver lesions using superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: comparison between ferumoxides-enhanced T1-weighted imaging and delayed-phase gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted imaging. Abdom Imaging 28:525–530

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Reimer P, Jahnke N, Fiebich M, Schima W, Deckers F, Marx C, Holzknecht N, Saini S (2000) Hepatic lesion detection and characterization: value of nonenhanced MR imaging, superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced MR imaging, and spiral CT-ROC analysis. Radiology 217:152–158

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim YK, Lee JM, Kim CS, Lee YH (2004) Gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced liver MR imaging: value of delayed imaging for the characterization and detection of focal liver lesions. Eur Radiol 14:5–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kim YK, Lee JM, Kim CS, Chung GH, Kim CY, Kim IH (2005) Detection of liver metastases: gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced three-dimensional dynamic phases and one-hour delayed phase MR imaging versus superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced MR imaging. Eur Radiol 15:220–228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hu H, He HD, Foley WD, Fox SH (2000) Four multidetector-row helical CT: image quality and volume coverage speed. Radiology 215:55–62

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Berland LL, Smith JK (1998) Multidetector-array CT: once again, technology creates new opportunities. Radiology 209:327–329

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Murakami T, Kim T, Takamura M, Hori M, Takahashi S, Federle MP, Tsuda K, Osuga K, Nakamura H, Kudo M (2001) Hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma: detection with double arterial phase multi-detector row helical CT. Radiology 218:763–767

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Foley WD, Mallisee TA, Hohenwalter MD, Wilson CR, Quiroz FA, Taylor AJ (2000) Multiphase hepatic CT with a multirow detector CT scanner. AJR Am J Roentgenol 175:679–685

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Wong K, Paulson EK, Nelson RC (2001) Breath-hold three-dimensional CT of the liver with multidetector helical CT. Radiology 219:75–79

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Practice guidelines in oncology—v.1 (2005) Invasive breast cancer/clinical staging. Available at http://www.nccn. org/. Accessed 27 February 2005

  21. Chakraborty DP, Winter LH (1990) Free-response methodology: alternate analysis and a new observer-performance experiment. Radiology 74:873–881

    Google Scholar 

  22. Metz CE (1986) ROC methodology in radiologic imaging. Invest Radiol 21:720–733

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Rao JN, Scott AJ (1992) A simple method for the analysis of clustered binary data. Biometrics 48:577–585

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Bipat S, van Leeuwen MS, Comans EFI, Piji ME, Bossuyt PM, Zwinderman AH, Stoker J (2005) Colorectal liver metastases: CT, MR imaging, and PET for diagnosis-meta-analysis. Radiology 237:123–131

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kim MJ, Kim JH, Lim JS, Oh YT, Chung JJ, Choi JS, Lee WJ, Kim KW (2004) Detection and characterization of focal hepatic lesions: mangafodipir vs. superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 20:612–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ward J, Robinson PJ, Guthrie JA, Downing S, Wilson D, Lodge JP, Prasad KR, Toogood GJ, Wyatt JI (2005) Liver metastases in candidates for hepatic resection: comparison of helical CT and gadolinium- and SPIO-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 237:170–180

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Fretz CJ, Elizondo G, Weissleder R, Hahn PF, Stark DD, Ferrucci JT Jr (1989) Superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced MR imaging: pulse sequence optimization for detection of liver cancer. Radiology 172:393–397

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim SH, Choi D, Lim JH, Lee WJ, Jang HJ, Lim HK, Lee SJ, Cho JM, Kim SK, Kim GC (2002) Optimal pulse sequence for ferumoxides-enhanced MR imaging used in the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma: a comparative study using seven pulse sequences. Korean J Radiol 3:87–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Abdelmoumene A, Chevallier P, Chalaron M, Schneider F, Verdun FR, Frascarolo P, Meuli R, Schnyder P, Denys A (2005) Detection of liver metastases under 2 cm: comparison of different acquisition protocols in four row multidetector-CT (MDCT). Eur Radiol 15:1881–1887

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Furuta A, Ito K, Fujita T, Koike S, Shimizu A, Matsunaga N (2004) Hepatic enhancement in multiphasic contrast-enhanced MDCT: comparison of high- and low-iodine-concentration contrast medium in same patients with chronic liver disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:157–162

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Yagyu Y, Awai K, Inoue M, Watai R, Sano T, Hasegawa H, Nishimura Y (2005) MDCT of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinomas: a prospective study using contrast materials with different iodine concentrations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1535–1540

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Sica GT, Ji H, Ros PR (2000) CT and MR imaging of hepatic metastases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174:691–698

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Urban BA, Fishman EK, Kuhlman JE, Kawashima A, Hennessey JG, Siegelman SS (1993) Detection of focal hepatic lesions with spiral CT: comparison of 4- and 8-mm interscan spacing. AJR Am J Roentgenol 160:783–785

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Obuchowski NA (2003) Receiver operating characteristic curves and their use in radiology. Radiology 229:3–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Zweig MH, Campbell G (1993) Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. Clin Chem 39:561–577

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Chonbuk National University Hospital and Medical School, Keum Am Dong, Jeon Ju, South Korea

    Young Kon Kim, Seog Wan Ko, Seung Bae Hwang & Chong Soo Kim

  2. Department of General Surgery, Chonbuk National University Hospital and Medical School, Jeon Ju, South Korea

    Hee Chul Yu

Authors
  1. Young Kon Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Seog Wan Ko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Seung Bae Hwang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chong Soo Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hee Chul Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Young Kon Kim.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kim, Y.K., Ko, S.W., Hwang, S.B. et al. Detection and characterization of liver metastases: 16--slice multidetector computed tomography versus superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 16, 1337–1345 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-0140-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-0140-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation