Comparison of hepatocellular carcinoma conspicuity on hepatobiliary phase images with gadoxetate disodium vs. delayed phase images with extracellular cellular contrast agent

So Yeon Kim, En Haw Wu, Seong Ho Park, Z. Jane Wang, Thomas A. Hope, Judy Yee, Li qin Zhao, Wei Chou Chang, Benjamin M. Yeh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare the conspicuity of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on hepatobiliary phase of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced vs. delayed phase of gadodiamide-enhanced MR images, relative to liver function. Methods and materials: We retrospectively identified 86 patients with newly diagnosed HCC between 2010 and 2013 and recorded the severity of liver disease by Child-Pugh class (CPC). 38 patients had gadodiamide-enhanced 5-min delayed and 48 had gadoxetate disodium-enhanced 20-min delayed hepatobiliary MR images. The conspicuity of 86 HCCs (mean size, 2.7 cm) was graded visually on a 3-point scale and quantified by liver-to-tumor contrast ratios (LTC). The relative liver parenchymal enhancement (RPE) was measured. For different CPCs, we compared the conspicuity of HCC and RPE between gadodiamide and gadoxetate. Results: In patients with CPC A, the visual conspicuity and LTC of the 27 HCCs imaged with gadodiamide were significantly lower than those of the 38 HCCs with gadoxetate (P < 0.01, <0.01, respectively). RPE was lower in gadodiamide scans than gadoxetate scans (P < 0.01). Conversely, in patients with CPC B and C, HCCs appeared more frequently as definite hypointensity when imaged with gadodiamide (72.7%, 8/11) than gadoxetate (20%, 2/10, P = 0.03). LTC (mean 18.1 vs. 7.5, P = 0.04) and RPE (mean 75.5 vs. 45.4, P = 0.04) was significantly higher in the gadodiamide than gadoxetate scans. Conclusion: In patients with compromised liver function, hypointensity of HCC is more conspicuous in the gadodiamide delayed phase than the gadoxetate hepatobiliary phase. This likely reflects the high extracellular accumulation of gadodiamide and poor hepatocyte uptake of gadoxetate in patients with compromised liver function.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1522-1531
Number of pages10
JournalAbdominal Radiology
Volume41
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

gadodiamide
Contrast Media
Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Liver
gadolinium ethoxybenzyl DTPA
Neoplasms

Keywords

  • Gadoxetate
  • Hepatocellular carcinoma
  • Liver MRI
  • Washout

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Gastroenterology
  • Urology

Cite this

Comparison of hepatocellular carcinoma conspicuity on hepatobiliary phase images with gadoxetate disodium vs. delayed phase images with extracellular cellular contrast agent. / Kim, So Yeon; Wu, En Haw; Park, Seong Ho; Wang, Z. Jane; Hope, Thomas A.; Yee, Judy; Zhao, Li qin; Chang, Wei Chou; Yeh, Benjamin M.

In: Abdominal Radiology, Vol. 41, No. 8, 01.08.2016, p. 1522-1531.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kim, So Yeon ; Wu, En Haw ; Park, Seong Ho ; Wang, Z. Jane ; Hope, Thomas A. ; Yee, Judy ; Zhao, Li qin ; Chang, Wei Chou ; Yeh, Benjamin M. / Comparison of hepatocellular carcinoma conspicuity on hepatobiliary phase images with gadoxetate disodium vs. delayed phase images with extracellular cellular contrast agent. In: Abdominal Radiology. 2016 ; Vol. 41, No. 8. pp. 1522-1531.
@article{f2e9656bb0604fad903a104e868c7fad,
title = "Comparison of hepatocellular carcinoma conspicuity on hepatobiliary phase images with gadoxetate disodium vs. delayed phase images with extracellular cellular contrast agent",
abstract = "Objective: To compare the conspicuity of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on hepatobiliary phase of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced vs. delayed phase of gadodiamide-enhanced MR images, relative to liver function. Methods and materials: We retrospectively identified 86 patients with newly diagnosed HCC between 2010 and 2013 and recorded the severity of liver disease by Child-Pugh class (CPC). 38 patients had gadodiamide-enhanced 5-min delayed and 48 had gadoxetate disodium-enhanced 20-min delayed hepatobiliary MR images. The conspicuity of 86 HCCs (mean size, 2.7 cm) was graded visually on a 3-point scale and quantified by liver-to-tumor contrast ratios (LTC). The relative liver parenchymal enhancement (RPE) was measured. For different CPCs, we compared the conspicuity of HCC and RPE between gadodiamide and gadoxetate. Results: In patients with CPC A, the visual conspicuity and LTC of the 27 HCCs imaged with gadodiamide were significantly lower than those of the 38 HCCs with gadoxetate (P < 0.01, <0.01, respectively). RPE was lower in gadodiamide scans than gadoxetate scans (P < 0.01). Conversely, in patients with CPC B and C, HCCs appeared more frequently as definite hypointensity when imaged with gadodiamide (72.7{\%}, 8/11) than gadoxetate (20{\%}, 2/10, P = 0.03). LTC (mean 18.1 vs. 7.5, P = 0.04) and RPE (mean 75.5 vs. 45.4, P = 0.04) was significantly higher in the gadodiamide than gadoxetate scans. Conclusion: In patients with compromised liver function, hypointensity of HCC is more conspicuous in the gadodiamide delayed phase than the gadoxetate hepatobiliary phase. This likely reflects the high extracellular accumulation of gadodiamide and poor hepatocyte uptake of gadoxetate in patients with compromised liver function.",
keywords = "Gadoxetate, Hepatocellular carcinoma, Liver MRI, Washout",
author = "Kim, {So Yeon} and Wu, {En Haw} and Park, {Seong Ho} and Wang, {Z. Jane} and Hope, {Thomas A.} and Judy Yee and Zhao, {Li qin} and Chang, {Wei Chou} and Yeh, {Benjamin M.}",
year = "2016",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00261-016-0703-1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "41",
pages = "1522--1531",
journal = "Abdominal Radiology",
issn = "2366-004X",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of hepatocellular carcinoma conspicuity on hepatobiliary phase images with gadoxetate disodium vs. delayed phase images with extracellular cellular contrast agent

AU - Kim, So Yeon

AU - Wu, En Haw

AU - Park, Seong Ho

AU - Wang, Z. Jane

AU - Hope, Thomas A.

AU - Yee, Judy

AU - Zhao, Li qin

AU - Chang, Wei Chou

AU - Yeh, Benjamin M.

PY - 2016/8/1

Y1 - 2016/8/1

N2 - Objective: To compare the conspicuity of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on hepatobiliary phase of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced vs. delayed phase of gadodiamide-enhanced MR images, relative to liver function. Methods and materials: We retrospectively identified 86 patients with newly diagnosed HCC between 2010 and 2013 and recorded the severity of liver disease by Child-Pugh class (CPC). 38 patients had gadodiamide-enhanced 5-min delayed and 48 had gadoxetate disodium-enhanced 20-min delayed hepatobiliary MR images. The conspicuity of 86 HCCs (mean size, 2.7 cm) was graded visually on a 3-point scale and quantified by liver-to-tumor contrast ratios (LTC). The relative liver parenchymal enhancement (RPE) was measured. For different CPCs, we compared the conspicuity of HCC and RPE between gadodiamide and gadoxetate. Results: In patients with CPC A, the visual conspicuity and LTC of the 27 HCCs imaged with gadodiamide were significantly lower than those of the 38 HCCs with gadoxetate (P < 0.01, <0.01, respectively). RPE was lower in gadodiamide scans than gadoxetate scans (P < 0.01). Conversely, in patients with CPC B and C, HCCs appeared more frequently as definite hypointensity when imaged with gadodiamide (72.7%, 8/11) than gadoxetate (20%, 2/10, P = 0.03). LTC (mean 18.1 vs. 7.5, P = 0.04) and RPE (mean 75.5 vs. 45.4, P = 0.04) was significantly higher in the gadodiamide than gadoxetate scans. Conclusion: In patients with compromised liver function, hypointensity of HCC is more conspicuous in the gadodiamide delayed phase than the gadoxetate hepatobiliary phase. This likely reflects the high extracellular accumulation of gadodiamide and poor hepatocyte uptake of gadoxetate in patients with compromised liver function.

AB - Objective: To compare the conspicuity of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on hepatobiliary phase of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced vs. delayed phase of gadodiamide-enhanced MR images, relative to liver function. Methods and materials: We retrospectively identified 86 patients with newly diagnosed HCC between 2010 and 2013 and recorded the severity of liver disease by Child-Pugh class (CPC). 38 patients had gadodiamide-enhanced 5-min delayed and 48 had gadoxetate disodium-enhanced 20-min delayed hepatobiliary MR images. The conspicuity of 86 HCCs (mean size, 2.7 cm) was graded visually on a 3-point scale and quantified by liver-to-tumor contrast ratios (LTC). The relative liver parenchymal enhancement (RPE) was measured. For different CPCs, we compared the conspicuity of HCC and RPE between gadodiamide and gadoxetate. Results: In patients with CPC A, the visual conspicuity and LTC of the 27 HCCs imaged with gadodiamide were significantly lower than those of the 38 HCCs with gadoxetate (P < 0.01, <0.01, respectively). RPE was lower in gadodiamide scans than gadoxetate scans (P < 0.01). Conversely, in patients with CPC B and C, HCCs appeared more frequently as definite hypointensity when imaged with gadodiamide (72.7%, 8/11) than gadoxetate (20%, 2/10, P = 0.03). LTC (mean 18.1 vs. 7.5, P = 0.04) and RPE (mean 75.5 vs. 45.4, P = 0.04) was significantly higher in the gadodiamide than gadoxetate scans. Conclusion: In patients with compromised liver function, hypointensity of HCC is more conspicuous in the gadodiamide delayed phase than the gadoxetate hepatobiliary phase. This likely reflects the high extracellular accumulation of gadodiamide and poor hepatocyte uptake of gadoxetate in patients with compromised liver function.

KW - Gadoxetate

KW - Hepatocellular carcinoma

KW - Liver MRI

KW - Washout

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84982813859&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84982813859&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00261-016-0703-1

DO - 10.1007/s00261-016-0703-1

M3 - Article

VL - 41

SP - 1522

EP - 1531

JO - Abdominal Radiology

JF - Abdominal Radiology

SN - 2366-004X

IS - 8

ER -