TY - JOUR
T1 - Gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI
T2 - Assessment of arterial phase artifacts and hepatobiliary uptake in a large series
AU - Vietti Violi, Naik
AU - Argiriadi, Pamela
AU - Rosen, Ally
AU - Cherny, Mathew
AU - Weiss, Amanda
AU - Hernandez-Meza, Gabriela
AU - Babb, James S.
AU - Kihira, Shingo
AU - Lewis, Sara
AU - Taouli, Bachir
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2020/11
Y1 - 2020/11
N2 - Purpose: To report the quality of gadoxetate disodium MRI in a large series by assessing the prevalence of: 1) arterial phase (AP) artifacts and its predictive factors, 2) decreased hepatic contrast uptake during the hepatobiliary phase (HBP). Methods: This retrospective single center study included 851 patients (M/F:537/314, mean age: 63y) with gadoxetate disodium MRI. The MRI protocol included unenhanced, dual arterial [early and late arterial phases (AP)], portal venous, transitional and hepatobiliary phases. Three radiologists graded dynamic images using a 5-scale score (1: no motion, 5: severe, nondiagnostic) for assessment of transient severe motion (TSM, defined as a score ≥4 during at least one AP with a score ≤3 during other phases). HBP uptake was assessed using a 3-scale score (based on portal vein/hepatic signal). The association between demographic, clinical and acquisition parameters with TSM was tested in uni- and multivariate logistic regression. Results: TSM was observed in 103/851 patients (12.1 %): 83 (9.8 %) in one AP and 20 (2.3 %) in both APs. A score of 5 (nondiagnostic) was assigned in 7 patients in one AP (0.8 %) and none in both. Presence of TSM was significantly associated with age (p = 0.002) and liver disease (p = 0.033) in univariate but not in multivariate analysis (p > 0.05). No association was found between acquisition parameters and TSM occurrence. Limited or severely limited HBP contrast uptake was observed in 87 patients (10.2 %), and TSM was never associated with severely limited HBP contrast uptake. Conclusion: TSM was present in approximately 12 % of gadoxetate disodium MRIs, rarely on both APs (2.3 %), and was poorly predicted. TSM was never associated with severely limited HBP contrast uptake.
AB - Purpose: To report the quality of gadoxetate disodium MRI in a large series by assessing the prevalence of: 1) arterial phase (AP) artifacts and its predictive factors, 2) decreased hepatic contrast uptake during the hepatobiliary phase (HBP). Methods: This retrospective single center study included 851 patients (M/F:537/314, mean age: 63y) with gadoxetate disodium MRI. The MRI protocol included unenhanced, dual arterial [early and late arterial phases (AP)], portal venous, transitional and hepatobiliary phases. Three radiologists graded dynamic images using a 5-scale score (1: no motion, 5: severe, nondiagnostic) for assessment of transient severe motion (TSM, defined as a score ≥4 during at least one AP with a score ≤3 during other phases). HBP uptake was assessed using a 3-scale score (based on portal vein/hepatic signal). The association between demographic, clinical and acquisition parameters with TSM was tested in uni- and multivariate logistic regression. Results: TSM was observed in 103/851 patients (12.1 %): 83 (9.8 %) in one AP and 20 (2.3 %) in both APs. A score of 5 (nondiagnostic) was assigned in 7 patients in one AP (0.8 %) and none in both. Presence of TSM was significantly associated with age (p = 0.002) and liver disease (p = 0.033) in univariate but not in multivariate analysis (p > 0.05). No association was found between acquisition parameters and TSM occurrence. Limited or severely limited HBP contrast uptake was observed in 87 patients (10.2 %), and TSM was never associated with severely limited HBP contrast uptake. Conclusion: TSM was present in approximately 12 % of gadoxetate disodium MRIs, rarely on both APs (2.3 %), and was poorly predicted. TSM was never associated with severely limited HBP contrast uptake.
KW - Gadoxetate disodium
KW - Hepatobiliary phase
KW - MRI
KW - Transient severe motion
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85092485257&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109313
DO - 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109313
M3 - Article
C2 - 33053495
AN - SCOPUS:85092485257
SN - 0720-048X
VL - 132
JO - European Journal of Radiology
JF - European Journal of Radiology
M1 - 109313
ER -