Cargando…
MR imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: prospective intraindividual head-to-head comparison of the contrast agents gadoxetic acid and gadoteric acid
The routine use of dynamic-contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) of the liver using hepatocyte-specific contrast agent (HSCA) as the standard of care for the study of focal liver lesions is not widely accepted and opponents invoke the risk of a loss in near 100% specificity of extracellular contrast agent...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9633770/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36329107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-23397-1 |
_version_ | 1784824312439504896 |
---|---|
author | Collettini, Federico Elkilany, Aboelyazid Seta, Marta Della Steffen, Ingo G. Collettini, Jasmin Maya Penzkofer, Tobias Schmelzle, Moritz Denecke, Timm |
author_facet | Collettini, Federico Elkilany, Aboelyazid Seta, Marta Della Steffen, Ingo G. Collettini, Jasmin Maya Penzkofer, Tobias Schmelzle, Moritz Denecke, Timm |
author_sort | Collettini, Federico |
collection | PubMed |
description | The routine use of dynamic-contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) of the liver using hepatocyte-specific contrast agent (HSCA) as the standard of care for the study of focal liver lesions is not widely accepted and opponents invoke the risk of a loss in near 100% specificity of extracellular contrast agents (ECA) and the need for prospective head-to-head comparative studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of both contrast agents. The Purpose of this prospective intraindividual study was to conduct a quantitative and qualitative head-to-head comparison of DCE-MRI using HSCA and ECA in patients with liver cirrhosis and HCC. Twenty-three patients with liver cirrhosis and proven HCC underwent two 3 T-MR examinations, one with ECA (gadoteric acid) and the other with HSCA (gadoxetic acid). Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), wash-in, wash-out, image quality, artifacts, lesion conspicuity, and major imaging features of LI-RADS v2018 were evaluated. Wash-in and wash-out were significantly stronger with ECA compared to HSCA (P < 0.001 and 0.006, respectively). During the late arterial phase (LAP), CNR was significantly lower with ECA (P = 0.005), while SNR did not differ significantly (P = 0.39). In qualitative analysis, ECA produced a better overall image quality during the portal venous phase (PVP) and delayed phase (DP) compared to HSCA (P = 0.041 and 0.008), showed less artifacts in the LAP and PVP (P = 0.003 and 0.034) and a higher lesion conspicuity in the LAP and PVP (P = 0.004 and 0.037). There was no significant difference in overall image quality during the LAP (P = 1), in artifacts and lesion conspicuity during the DP (P = 0.078 and 0.073) or in the frequency of the three major LI-RADS v2018 imaging features. In conclusion, ECA provides superior contrast of HCC—especially hypervascular HCC lesions—in DCE-MR in terms of better perceptibility of early enhancement and a stronger washout. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9633770 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96337702022-11-05 MR imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: prospective intraindividual head-to-head comparison of the contrast agents gadoxetic acid and gadoteric acid Collettini, Federico Elkilany, Aboelyazid Seta, Marta Della Steffen, Ingo G. Collettini, Jasmin Maya Penzkofer, Tobias Schmelzle, Moritz Denecke, Timm Sci Rep Article The routine use of dynamic-contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) of the liver using hepatocyte-specific contrast agent (HSCA) as the standard of care for the study of focal liver lesions is not widely accepted and opponents invoke the risk of a loss in near 100% specificity of extracellular contrast agents (ECA) and the need for prospective head-to-head comparative studies evaluating the diagnostic performance of both contrast agents. The Purpose of this prospective intraindividual study was to conduct a quantitative and qualitative head-to-head comparison of DCE-MRI using HSCA and ECA in patients with liver cirrhosis and HCC. Twenty-three patients with liver cirrhosis and proven HCC underwent two 3 T-MR examinations, one with ECA (gadoteric acid) and the other with HSCA (gadoxetic acid). Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), wash-in, wash-out, image quality, artifacts, lesion conspicuity, and major imaging features of LI-RADS v2018 were evaluated. Wash-in and wash-out were significantly stronger with ECA compared to HSCA (P < 0.001 and 0.006, respectively). During the late arterial phase (LAP), CNR was significantly lower with ECA (P = 0.005), while SNR did not differ significantly (P = 0.39). In qualitative analysis, ECA produced a better overall image quality during the portal venous phase (PVP) and delayed phase (DP) compared to HSCA (P = 0.041 and 0.008), showed less artifacts in the LAP and PVP (P = 0.003 and 0.034) and a higher lesion conspicuity in the LAP and PVP (P = 0.004 and 0.037). There was no significant difference in overall image quality during the LAP (P = 1), in artifacts and lesion conspicuity during the DP (P = 0.078 and 0.073) or in the frequency of the three major LI-RADS v2018 imaging features. In conclusion, ECA provides superior contrast of HCC—especially hypervascular HCC lesions—in DCE-MR in terms of better perceptibility of early enhancement and a stronger washout. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-11-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9633770/ /pubmed/36329107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-23397-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Collettini, Federico Elkilany, Aboelyazid Seta, Marta Della Steffen, Ingo G. Collettini, Jasmin Maya Penzkofer, Tobias Schmelzle, Moritz Denecke, Timm MR imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: prospective intraindividual head-to-head comparison of the contrast agents gadoxetic acid and gadoteric acid |
title | MR imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: prospective intraindividual head-to-head comparison of the contrast agents gadoxetic acid and gadoteric acid |
title_full | MR imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: prospective intraindividual head-to-head comparison of the contrast agents gadoxetic acid and gadoteric acid |
title_fullStr | MR imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: prospective intraindividual head-to-head comparison of the contrast agents gadoxetic acid and gadoteric acid |
title_full_unstemmed | MR imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: prospective intraindividual head-to-head comparison of the contrast agents gadoxetic acid and gadoteric acid |
title_short | MR imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: prospective intraindividual head-to-head comparison of the contrast agents gadoxetic acid and gadoteric acid |
title_sort | mr imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma: prospective intraindividual head-to-head comparison of the contrast agents gadoxetic acid and gadoteric acid |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9633770/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36329107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-23397-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT collettinifederico mrimagingofhepatocellularcarcinomaprospectiveintraindividualheadtoheadcomparisonofthecontrastagentsgadoxeticacidandgadotericacid AT elkilanyaboelyazid mrimagingofhepatocellularcarcinomaprospectiveintraindividualheadtoheadcomparisonofthecontrastagentsgadoxeticacidandgadotericacid AT setamartadella mrimagingofhepatocellularcarcinomaprospectiveintraindividualheadtoheadcomparisonofthecontrastagentsgadoxeticacidandgadotericacid AT steffeningog mrimagingofhepatocellularcarcinomaprospectiveintraindividualheadtoheadcomparisonofthecontrastagentsgadoxeticacidandgadotericacid AT collettinijasminmaya mrimagingofhepatocellularcarcinomaprospectiveintraindividualheadtoheadcomparisonofthecontrastagentsgadoxeticacidandgadotericacid AT penzkofertobias mrimagingofhepatocellularcarcinomaprospectiveintraindividualheadtoheadcomparisonofthecontrastagentsgadoxeticacidandgadotericacid AT schmelzlemoritz mrimagingofhepatocellularcarcinomaprospectiveintraindividualheadtoheadcomparisonofthecontrastagentsgadoxeticacidandgadotericacid AT denecketimm mrimagingofhepatocellularcarcinomaprospectiveintraindividualheadtoheadcomparisonofthecontrastagentsgadoxeticacidandgadotericacid |