Comparison of gadoxetic acid and gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI for HCC detection: prospective crossover study at 3 T
Background Gadoxetic acid and gadopentetate dimeglumine are gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) with an established role in HCC detection and characterization. Purpose To compare gadopentetate dimeglumine and gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for image quality and hepatoc...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Acta radiologica open 2015-02, Vol.4 (2), p.2047981614561285-2047981614561285 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 2047981614561285 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 2047981614561285 |
container_title | Acta radiologica open |
container_volume | 4 |
creator | Besa, Cecilia Kakite, Suguru Cooper, Nancy Facciuto, Marcelo Taouli, Bachir |
description | Background
Gadoxetic acid and gadopentetate dimeglumine are gadolinium-based contrast
agents (GBCAs) with an established role in HCC detection and
characterization.
Purpose
To compare gadopentetate dimeglumine and gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic
resonance imaging (MRI) for image quality and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)
detection/conspicuity.
Material and Methods
In this IRB approved cross-over pilot prospective study, 12 patients (all
men; mean age, 56 years) with chronic liver disease at risk of HCC underwent
two repeat MRI examinations using gadopentetate dimeglumine and gadoxetic
acid (mean interval between studies, 5 days). Two independent observers
analyzed images for image quality and HCC detection/conspicuity. Per-lesion
sensitivity, positive predictive value, quantitative enhancement, and
lesion-to-liver contrast ratio were calculated for both contrast agents.
Results
There was no significant difference in image quality scores between both
GBCAs (P = 0.3). A total of 20 HCCs were identified with
reference standard in 12 patients (mean size 2.6 cm, range, 1.0–5.0 cm).
Higher sensitivity was seen for observer 1 for gadoxetic acid-set in
comparison with gadopentetate dimeglumine-set (sensitivity increased from
85.7% to 92.8%), while no difference was noted for observer 2 (sensitivity
of 78.5%). Lesion conspicuity was significantly higher on hepatobiliary
phase (HBP) images compared to arterial phase images with both GBCAs for
both observers (P |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/2047981614561285 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4364400</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_2047981614561285</sage_id><sourcerecordid>1665126039</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-f80bac72f1304a6363ed40441f793f6c5667e6e9c2459b3ee05396a150d909973</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1UU1v1DAQjSoQrUrvnCofuQTGseOsOSChCGilIqSqnC2vPdm6SuxgO6v2BFf-Jr8Et1uqgtTTfPjNG795VfWKwhtKu-5tA7yTKyoobwVtVu1eddBAu6q5APrsUb5fHaV0BQAFyERLX1T7TdtJRikcVD_6MM06uhQ8CQPZaBuuMTtDtHGWaG_vWjP6jFlnJNZNuBmXyXms0V9qb9CSL-enZAiRnPQ9sZjRZBf8OzLHkObbYovElDyFLUaS8mJviM6E_f756-Jl9XzQY8Kj-3hYffv08aI_qc--fj7tP5zVhgme62EFa226ZqAMuBZMMLQcOKdDETII0wrRoUBpGt7KNUOElkmhaQtWgpQdO6ze73jnZT2hNUVQ1KOao5t0vFFBO_Xvi3eXahO2ipf9HKAQvL4niOH7gimrySWD46g9hiUpKsppGwFMFijsoHeiIw4PayioW-vU_9aVkePH33sY-GtUAdQ7QNIbVFdhib6c62nCP-vhots</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1665126039</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of gadoxetic acid and gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI for HCC detection: prospective crossover study at 3 T</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Sage Journals GOLD Open Access 2024</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Besa, Cecilia ; Kakite, Suguru ; Cooper, Nancy ; Facciuto, Marcelo ; Taouli, Bachir</creator><creatorcontrib>Besa, Cecilia ; Kakite, Suguru ; Cooper, Nancy ; Facciuto, Marcelo ; Taouli, Bachir</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Gadoxetic acid and gadopentetate dimeglumine are gadolinium-based contrast
agents (GBCAs) with an established role in HCC detection and
characterization.
Purpose
To compare gadopentetate dimeglumine and gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic
resonance imaging (MRI) for image quality and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)
detection/conspicuity.
Material and Methods
In this IRB approved cross-over pilot prospective study, 12 patients (all
men; mean age, 56 years) with chronic liver disease at risk of HCC underwent
two repeat MRI examinations using gadopentetate dimeglumine and gadoxetic
acid (mean interval between studies, 5 days). Two independent observers
analyzed images for image quality and HCC detection/conspicuity. Per-lesion
sensitivity, positive predictive value, quantitative enhancement, and
lesion-to-liver contrast ratio were calculated for both contrast agents.
Results
There was no significant difference in image quality scores between both
GBCAs (P = 0.3). A total of 20 HCCs were identified with
reference standard in 12 patients (mean size 2.6 cm, range, 1.0–5.0 cm).
Higher sensitivity was seen for observer 1 for gadoxetic acid-set in
comparison with gadopentetate dimeglumine-set (sensitivity increased from
85.7% to 92.8%), while no difference was noted for observer 2 (sensitivity
of 78.5%). Lesion conspicuity was significantly higher on hepatobiliary
phase (HBP) images compared to arterial phase images with both GBCAs for
both observers (P < 0.05). Lesion-to-liver contrast
ratios were significantly higher for HBP compared to all dynamic phases for
both agents (P < 0.05).
Conclusion
Our initial experience suggests that gadoxetic acid-set was superior to
gadopentetate dimeglumine-set in terms of HCC detection for one observer,
with improved lesion conspicuity and liver-to-lesion contrast on HBP
images.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2058-4601</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2058-4601</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/2047981614561285</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25793110</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Original</subject><ispartof>Acta radiologica open, 2015-02, Vol.4 (2), p.2047981614561285-2047981614561285</ispartof><rights>The Foundation Acta Radiologica 2015 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav</rights><rights>The Foundation Acta Radiologica 2015 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav 2015 The Foundation Acta Radiologica</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-f80bac72f1304a6363ed40441f793f6c5667e6e9c2459b3ee05396a150d909973</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-f80bac72f1304a6363ed40441f793f6c5667e6e9c2459b3ee05396a150d909973</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4364400/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4364400/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,725,778,782,862,883,21949,27836,27907,27908,44928,45316,53774,53776</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25793110$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Besa, Cecilia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kakite, Suguru</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cooper, Nancy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Facciuto, Marcelo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taouli, Bachir</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of gadoxetic acid and gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI for HCC detection: prospective crossover study at 3 T</title><title>Acta radiologica open</title><addtitle>Acta Radiol Open</addtitle><description>Background
Gadoxetic acid and gadopentetate dimeglumine are gadolinium-based contrast
agents (GBCAs) with an established role in HCC detection and
characterization.
Purpose
To compare gadopentetate dimeglumine and gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic
resonance imaging (MRI) for image quality and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)
detection/conspicuity.
Material and Methods
In this IRB approved cross-over pilot prospective study, 12 patients (all
men; mean age, 56 years) with chronic liver disease at risk of HCC underwent
two repeat MRI examinations using gadopentetate dimeglumine and gadoxetic
acid (mean interval between studies, 5 days). Two independent observers
analyzed images for image quality and HCC detection/conspicuity. Per-lesion
sensitivity, positive predictive value, quantitative enhancement, and
lesion-to-liver contrast ratio were calculated for both contrast agents.
Results
There was no significant difference in image quality scores between both
GBCAs (P = 0.3). A total of 20 HCCs were identified with
reference standard in 12 patients (mean size 2.6 cm, range, 1.0–5.0 cm).
Higher sensitivity was seen for observer 1 for gadoxetic acid-set in
comparison with gadopentetate dimeglumine-set (sensitivity increased from
85.7% to 92.8%), while no difference was noted for observer 2 (sensitivity
of 78.5%). Lesion conspicuity was significantly higher on hepatobiliary
phase (HBP) images compared to arterial phase images with both GBCAs for
both observers (P < 0.05). Lesion-to-liver contrast
ratios were significantly higher for HBP compared to all dynamic phases for
both agents (P < 0.05).
Conclusion
Our initial experience suggests that gadoxetic acid-set was superior to
gadopentetate dimeglumine-set in terms of HCC detection for one observer,
with improved lesion conspicuity and liver-to-lesion contrast on HBP
images.</description><subject>Original</subject><issn>2058-4601</issn><issn>2058-4601</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFRWT</sourceid><recordid>eNp1UU1v1DAQjSoQrUrvnCofuQTGseOsOSChCGilIqSqnC2vPdm6SuxgO6v2BFf-Jr8Et1uqgtTTfPjNG795VfWKwhtKu-5tA7yTKyoobwVtVu1eddBAu6q5APrsUb5fHaV0BQAFyERLX1T7TdtJRikcVD_6MM06uhQ8CQPZaBuuMTtDtHGWaG_vWjP6jFlnJNZNuBmXyXms0V9qb9CSL-enZAiRnPQ9sZjRZBf8OzLHkObbYovElDyFLUaS8mJviM6E_f756-Jl9XzQY8Kj-3hYffv08aI_qc--fj7tP5zVhgme62EFa226ZqAMuBZMMLQcOKdDETII0wrRoUBpGt7KNUOElkmhaQtWgpQdO6ze73jnZT2hNUVQ1KOao5t0vFFBO_Xvi3eXahO2ipf9HKAQvL4niOH7gimrySWD46g9hiUpKsppGwFMFijsoHeiIw4PayioW-vU_9aVkePH33sY-GtUAdQ7QNIbVFdhib6c62nCP-vhots</recordid><startdate>20150201</startdate><enddate>20150201</enddate><creator>Besa, Cecilia</creator><creator>Kakite, Suguru</creator><creator>Cooper, Nancy</creator><creator>Facciuto, Marcelo</creator><creator>Taouli, Bachir</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>AFRWT</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150201</creationdate><title>Comparison of gadoxetic acid and gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI for HCC detection: prospective crossover study at 3 T</title><author>Besa, Cecilia ; Kakite, Suguru ; Cooper, Nancy ; Facciuto, Marcelo ; Taouli, Bachir</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c364t-f80bac72f1304a6363ed40441f793f6c5667e6e9c2459b3ee05396a150d909973</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Original</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Besa, Cecilia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kakite, Suguru</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cooper, Nancy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Facciuto, Marcelo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Taouli, Bachir</creatorcontrib><collection>Sage Journals GOLD Open Access 2024</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Acta radiologica open</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Besa, Cecilia</au><au>Kakite, Suguru</au><au>Cooper, Nancy</au><au>Facciuto, Marcelo</au><au>Taouli, Bachir</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of gadoxetic acid and gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI for HCC detection: prospective crossover study at 3 T</atitle><jtitle>Acta radiologica open</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Radiol Open</addtitle><date>2015-02-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>4</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>2047981614561285</spage><epage>2047981614561285</epage><pages>2047981614561285-2047981614561285</pages><issn>2058-4601</issn><eissn>2058-4601</eissn><abstract>Background
Gadoxetic acid and gadopentetate dimeglumine are gadolinium-based contrast
agents (GBCAs) with an established role in HCC detection and
characterization.
Purpose
To compare gadopentetate dimeglumine and gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic
resonance imaging (MRI) for image quality and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)
detection/conspicuity.
Material and Methods
In this IRB approved cross-over pilot prospective study, 12 patients (all
men; mean age, 56 years) with chronic liver disease at risk of HCC underwent
two repeat MRI examinations using gadopentetate dimeglumine and gadoxetic
acid (mean interval between studies, 5 days). Two independent observers
analyzed images for image quality and HCC detection/conspicuity. Per-lesion
sensitivity, positive predictive value, quantitative enhancement, and
lesion-to-liver contrast ratio were calculated for both contrast agents.
Results
There was no significant difference in image quality scores between both
GBCAs (P = 0.3). A total of 20 HCCs were identified with
reference standard in 12 patients (mean size 2.6 cm, range, 1.0–5.0 cm).
Higher sensitivity was seen for observer 1 for gadoxetic acid-set in
comparison with gadopentetate dimeglumine-set (sensitivity increased from
85.7% to 92.8%), while no difference was noted for observer 2 (sensitivity
of 78.5%). Lesion conspicuity was significantly higher on hepatobiliary
phase (HBP) images compared to arterial phase images with both GBCAs for
both observers (P < 0.05). Lesion-to-liver contrast
ratios were significantly higher for HBP compared to all dynamic phases for
both agents (P < 0.05).
Conclusion
Our initial experience suggests that gadoxetic acid-set was superior to
gadopentetate dimeglumine-set in terms of HCC detection for one observer,
with improved lesion conspicuity and liver-to-lesion contrast on HBP
images.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>25793110</pmid><doi>10.1177/2047981614561285</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2058-4601 |
ispartof | Acta radiologica open, 2015-02, Vol.4 (2), p.2047981614561285-2047981614561285 |
issn | 2058-4601 2058-4601 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4364400 |
source | DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Sage Journals GOLD Open Access 2024; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; PubMed Central |
subjects | Original |
title | Comparison of gadoxetic acid and gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI for HCC detection: prospective crossover study at 3 T |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T11%3A23%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20gadoxetic%20acid%20and%20gadopentetate%20dimeglumine-enhanced%20MRI%20for%20HCC%20detection:%20prospective%20crossover%20study%20at%203%E2%80%89T&rft.jtitle=Acta%20radiologica%20open&rft.au=Besa,%20Cecilia&rft.date=2015-02-01&rft.volume=4&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=2047981614561285&rft.epage=2047981614561285&rft.pages=2047981614561285-2047981614561285&rft.issn=2058-4601&rft.eissn=2058-4601&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/2047981614561285&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1665126039%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1665126039&rft_id=info:pmid/25793110&rft_sage_id=10.1177_2047981614561285&rfr_iscdi=true |