Non-contrast liver MRI as an alternative to gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for liver metastasis from colorectal cancer.


Journal

Acta radiologica (Stockholm, Sweden : 1987)
ISSN: 1600-0455
Titre abrégé: Acta Radiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8706123

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Apr 2019
Historique:
pubmed: 23 8 2018
medline: 9 4 2019
entrez: 23 8 2018
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Liver magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides reliable diagnostic performance for detecting liver metastasis but is costly and time-consuming. To compare the diagnostic performance of non-contrast liver MRI to whole MRI using gadoxetic acid for detecting liver metastasis in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). We included 175 patients with histologically confirmed 401 liver metastases and 73 benign liver lesions. A non-contrast MRI (T1-weighted, T2-weighted, and diffusion-weighted images) with or without multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and a whole MRI (gadoxetic acid-enhanced and non-contrast MRI) were analyzed independently by two observers to detect liver metastasis using receiver operating characteristic analysis. We found no significant differences in Az value (range = 0.914-0.997), sensitivity (range = 95.2-99.6%), specificity (range = 77.3-100%), or positive (range = 92.9-100%) or negative predictive value (range = 87.5-95.7%) between the non-contrast MRI with or without MDCT and the whole MRI for both observers for all lesions as well as lesions ≤1.0 cm and lesions >1.0 cm in size ( P = 0.203-1.000). Combined MDCT and non-contrast MRI led to similar numbers of false-positive diagnosis to the whole MRI (eight for Observers 1 and 4 vs. 3 for Observer 2). Non-contrast liver MRI may serve as an alternative to gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for detecting and characterizing liver metastasis from CRC, at least in patients with relatively high risk of liver metastasis who underwent MDCT. Non-contrast liver MRI could be beneficial especially for patients with lesions that are already documented as benign but require additional follow-up MRIs.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Liver magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides reliable diagnostic performance for detecting liver metastasis but is costly and time-consuming.
PURPOSE OBJECTIVE
To compare the diagnostic performance of non-contrast liver MRI to whole MRI using gadoxetic acid for detecting liver metastasis in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).
MATERIAL AND METHODS METHODS
We included 175 patients with histologically confirmed 401 liver metastases and 73 benign liver lesions. A non-contrast MRI (T1-weighted, T2-weighted, and diffusion-weighted images) with or without multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and a whole MRI (gadoxetic acid-enhanced and non-contrast MRI) were analyzed independently by two observers to detect liver metastasis using receiver operating characteristic analysis.
RESULTS RESULTS
We found no significant differences in Az value (range = 0.914-0.997), sensitivity (range = 95.2-99.6%), specificity (range = 77.3-100%), or positive (range = 92.9-100%) or negative predictive value (range = 87.5-95.7%) between the non-contrast MRI with or without MDCT and the whole MRI for both observers for all lesions as well as lesions ≤1.0 cm and lesions >1.0 cm in size ( P = 0.203-1.000). Combined MDCT and non-contrast MRI led to similar numbers of false-positive diagnosis to the whole MRI (eight for Observers 1 and 4 vs. 3 for Observer 2).
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Non-contrast liver MRI may serve as an alternative to gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for detecting and characterizing liver metastasis from CRC, at least in patients with relatively high risk of liver metastasis who underwent MDCT. Non-contrast liver MRI could be beneficial especially for patients with lesions that are already documented as benign but require additional follow-up MRIs.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30130970
doi: 10.1177/0284185118788901
doi:

Substances chimiques

gadolinium ethoxybenzyl DTPA 0
Gadolinium DTPA K2I13DR72L

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

441-450

Auteurs

Jeong Ah Hwang (JA)

1 Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
2 Department of Radiology, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Cheonan hospital, Cheonan, Republic of Korea.

Young Kon Kim (YK)

1 Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Ji Hye Min (JH)

1 Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
3 Department of Radiology, Chungnam National University Hospital, Chungnam National University of College of Medicine, Daejeon, Republic of Korea.

Kyoung Doo Song (KD)

1 Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Insuk Sohn (I)

4 Statistics and Data Center, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Hyeon Seon Ahn (HS)

4 Statistics and Data Center, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH