Skip to main content
Log in

Comparison of gadolinium-EOB-DTPA-enhanced and diffusion-weighted liver MRI for detection of small hepatic metastases

  • Magnetic Resonance
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To compare the accuracy of gadolinium ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced MRI with that of diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) in the detection of small hepatic metastases (2 cm or smaller).

Methods

Forty-five patients underwent abdominal MRI at 3 T, including T1-weighted imaging (T1WI), T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), heavily T2WI (HASTE), DWI with a b-value of 500 s/mm2 and contrast-enhanced MRI with Gd-EOB-DTPA. Two groups were assigned and compared: group A (T1WI, T2WI, HASTE and contrast-enhanced study with Gd-EOB-DTPA), and group B (T1WI, T2WI, HASTE and DWI). Two observers independently interpreted the images obtained in a random order. For all hepatic metastases, the diagnostic performance using each imaging set was evaluated by receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

Results

A total of 51 hepatic metastases were confirmed. The area under the ROC curve (Az) of group A was larger than that of group B, and the difference in the mean Az values between the two image sets was statistically significant, whereas, there were three metastases that lay near thin vessels or among multiple cysts and were better visualised in group B than in group A.

Conclusion

Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI showed higher accuracy in the detection of small metastases than DWI.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hamm B, Staks T, Muhler A et al (1995) Phase I clinical evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA as a hepatobiliary MR contrast agent: safety, pharmacokinetics, and MR imaging. Radiology 195:785–792

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Vogl TJ, Kummel S, Hammerstingl R et al (1996) Liver tumors: comparison of MR imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-DTPA. Radiology 200:59–67

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Reimer P, Rummeny EJ, Shamsi K et al (1996) Phase II clinical evaluation of Gd-EOB-DTPA: dose, safety aspects, and pulse sequence. Radiology 199:177–183

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Zech CJ, Herrmann KA, Reiser MF et al (2007) MR imaging in patients with suspected liver metastases: value of liver-specific contrast agent Gd-EOB-DTPA. Magn Reson Med Sci 6:43–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ichikawa T, Haradome H, Hachiya J et al (1998) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging with a single-shot echoplanar sequence: detection and characterization of focal hepatic lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 170:397–402

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Xu PJ, Yan FH, Wang JH et al (2009) Added value of breathhold diffusion-weighted MRI in detection of small hepatocellular carcinoma lesions compared with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI alone using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. J Magn Reson Imaging 29:341–349

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fukatsu H (2003) 3T MR for clinical use: update. Magn Reson Med Sci 2:37–45

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Naganawa S, Sato C, Nakamura T et al (2005) Diffusion-weighted images of the liver: comparison of tumor detection before and after contrast enhancement with superparamagnetic iron oxide. J Magn Reson Imaging 21:836–840

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Nasu K, Kuroki Y, Nawano S et al (2006) Hepatic metastases: diffusion-weighted sensitivity-encoding versus SPIO-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 239:122–130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. No authors (2000) World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 284:3043–3045

    Google Scholar 

  11. van Persijn van Meerten EL, Gelderblom H, Bloem JL (2009) RECIST revised: implications for the radiologist. A review article on the modified RECIST guideline. Eur Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00330-009-1685-y [Epub ahead of print]

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mathieu D, Vilgrain V, Mahfouz A et al (1997) Benign liver tumors. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 5:255–288

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mortele KJ, Ros PR (2001) Cystic focal liver lesions in the adult: differential CT and MR imaging features. Radiographics 21:895–910

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Horton KM, Bluemke DA, Hruban RH et al (1999) CT and MR imaging of benign hepatic and biliary tumors. Radiographics 19:431–451

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kim T, Federle MP, Baron RL et al (2001) Discrimination of small hepatic hemangiomas from hypervascular malignant tumors smaller than 3 cm with three-phase helical CT. Radiology 219:699–706

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pedro MS, Semelka RC, Braga L (2002) MR imaging of hepatic metastases. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 10:15–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Danet IM, Semelka RC, Leonardou P et al (2003) Spectrum of MRI appearances of untreated metastases of the liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:809–817

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Low RN, Gurney J (2007) Diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) in the oncology patient: value of breathhold DWI compared to unenhanced and gadolinium-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 25:848–858

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Huppertz A, Balzer T, Blakeborough A et al (2004) Improved detection of focal liver lesions at MR imaging: multicenter comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR images with intraoperative findings. Radiology 230:266–275

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bluemke DA, Sahani D, Amendola M et al (2005) Efficacy and safety of MR imaging with liver-specific contrast agent: US multicenter phase III study. Radiology 237:89–98

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Zech CJ, Schoenberg SO, Herrmann KA et al (2004) Modern visualization of the liver with MRT. Current trends and future perspectives. Radiologe 44:1160–1169

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Onishi H, Murakami T, Kim T et al (2006) Hepatic metastases: detection with multi-detector row CT, SPIO-enhanced MR imaging, and both techniques combined. Radiology 239:131–138

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Huppertz A, Balzer T, Blakeborough A et al (2004) European EOB Study Group. Improved detection of focal liver lesions at MR imaging: multicenter comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR images with intraoperative findings. Radiology 230:266–275

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bluemke DA, Sahani D, Amendola M et al (2005) Efficacy and safety of MR imaging with liver-specific contrast agent: US multicenter phase III study. Radiology 237:89–98

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Vossen JA, Buijs M, Geschwind JF et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted and Gd-EOB-DTPA-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for characterization of tumor necrosis in an animal model. J Comput Assist Tomogr 33:626–630

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Choi JS, Kim MJ, Choi JY et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of liver on 3.0-Tesla system: effect of intravenous administration of gadoxetic acid disodium. Eur Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00330-009-1651-8 [Epub ahead of print]

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kotaro Shimada.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shimada, K., Isoda, H., Hirokawa, Y. et al. Comparison of gadolinium-EOB-DTPA-enhanced and diffusion-weighted liver MRI for detection of small hepatic metastases. Eur Radiol 20, 2690–2698 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-1842-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-1842-3

Keywords

Navigation