TY - JOUR
T1 - Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI perfusion quantification in hepatocellular carcinoma
T2 - comparison of gadoxetate disodium and gadobenate dimeglumine
AU - Stocker, Daniel
AU - Hectors, Stefanie
AU - Bane, Octavia
AU - Vietti-Violi, Naik
AU - Said, Daniela
AU - Kennedy, Paul
AU - Cuevas, Jordan
AU - Cunha, Guilherme M.
AU - Sirlin, Claude B.
AU - Fowler, Kathryn J.
AU - Lewis, Sara
AU - Taouli, Bachir
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, European Society of Radiology.
PY - 2021/12
Y1 - 2021/12
N2 - Objectives: (1) To assess the quality of the arterial input function (AIF) during dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI of the liver and (2) to quantify perfusion parameters of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and liver parenchyma during the first 3 min post-contrast injection with DCE-MRI using gadoxetate disodium compared to gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA) in different patient populations. Methods: In this prospective study, we evaluated 66 patients with 83 HCCs who underwent DCE-MRI, using gadoxetate disodium (group 1, n = 28) or Gd-BOPTA (group 2, n = 38). AIF qualitative and quantitative features were assessed. Perfusion parameters (based on the initial 3 min post-contrast) were extracted in tumours and liver parenchyma, including model-free parameters (time-to-peak enhancement (TTP), time-to-washout) and modelled parameters (arterial flow (Fa), portal venous flow (Fp), total flow (Ft), arterial fraction, mean transit time (MTT), distribution volume (DV)). In addition, lesion-to-liver contrast ratios (LLCRs) were measured. Fisher’s exact tests and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare the two groups. Results: AIF quality, modelled and model-free perfusion parameters in HCC were similar between the 2 groups (p = 0.054–0.932). Liver parenchymal flow was lower and liver enhancement occurred later in group 1 vs group 2 (Fp, p = 0.002; Ft, p = 0.001; TTP, MTT, all p < 0.001), while there were no significant differences in tumour LLCR (max. positive LLCR, p = 0.230; max. negative LLCR, p = 0.317). Conclusion: Gadoxetate disodium provides comparable AIF quality and HCC perfusion parameters compared to Gd-BOPTA during dynamic phases. Despite delayed and decreased liver enhancement with gadoxetate disodium, LLCRs were equivalent between contrast agents, indicating similar tumour conspicuity. Key Points: • Arterial input function quality, modelled, and model-free dynamic parameters measured in hepatocellular carcinoma are similar in patients receiving gadoxetate disodium or gadobenate dimeglumine during the first 3 min post injection. • Gadoxetate disodium and gadobenate dimeglumine show similar lesion-to-liver contrast ratios during dynamic phases in patients with HCC. • There is lower portal and lower total hepatic flow and longer hepatic mean transit time and time-to-peak with gadoxetate disodium compared to gadobenate dimeglumine.
AB - Objectives: (1) To assess the quality of the arterial input function (AIF) during dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI of the liver and (2) to quantify perfusion parameters of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and liver parenchyma during the first 3 min post-contrast injection with DCE-MRI using gadoxetate disodium compared to gadobenate dimeglumine (Gd-BOPTA) in different patient populations. Methods: In this prospective study, we evaluated 66 patients with 83 HCCs who underwent DCE-MRI, using gadoxetate disodium (group 1, n = 28) or Gd-BOPTA (group 2, n = 38). AIF qualitative and quantitative features were assessed. Perfusion parameters (based on the initial 3 min post-contrast) were extracted in tumours and liver parenchyma, including model-free parameters (time-to-peak enhancement (TTP), time-to-washout) and modelled parameters (arterial flow (Fa), portal venous flow (Fp), total flow (Ft), arterial fraction, mean transit time (MTT), distribution volume (DV)). In addition, lesion-to-liver contrast ratios (LLCRs) were measured. Fisher’s exact tests and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare the two groups. Results: AIF quality, modelled and model-free perfusion parameters in HCC were similar between the 2 groups (p = 0.054–0.932). Liver parenchymal flow was lower and liver enhancement occurred later in group 1 vs group 2 (Fp, p = 0.002; Ft, p = 0.001; TTP, MTT, all p < 0.001), while there were no significant differences in tumour LLCR (max. positive LLCR, p = 0.230; max. negative LLCR, p = 0.317). Conclusion: Gadoxetate disodium provides comparable AIF quality and HCC perfusion parameters compared to Gd-BOPTA during dynamic phases. Despite delayed and decreased liver enhancement with gadoxetate disodium, LLCRs were equivalent between contrast agents, indicating similar tumour conspicuity. Key Points: • Arterial input function quality, modelled, and model-free dynamic parameters measured in hepatocellular carcinoma are similar in patients receiving gadoxetate disodium or gadobenate dimeglumine during the first 3 min post injection. • Gadoxetate disodium and gadobenate dimeglumine show similar lesion-to-liver contrast ratios during dynamic phases in patients with HCC. • There is lower portal and lower total hepatic flow and longer hepatic mean transit time and time-to-peak with gadoxetate disodium compared to gadobenate dimeglumine.
KW - Carcinoma, hepatocellular
KW - Gadobenate dimeglumine
KW - Gadoxetate
KW - Liver neoplasms
KW - Magnetic resonance imaging
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85106685173&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00330-021-08068-5
DO - 10.1007/s00330-021-08068-5
M3 - Article
C2 - 34043055
AN - SCOPUS:85106685173
SN - 0938-7994
VL - 31
SP - 9306
EP - 9315
JO - European Radiology
JF - European Radiology
IS - 12
ER -