title: Detection of focal hepatic lesions: comparison of unenhanced and SHU 555 A-enhanced MR imaging versus biphasic helical CTAP.
abstract: The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic sensitivity of unenhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, and MR imaging with a new superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO)-enhanced contrast agent (SHU 555 A) with biphasic helical computed tomography during arterial portography (CTAP) in patients with focal liver lesions. Eighteen patients with a total of 91 (78 malignant, 13 benign) proven liver lesions underwent unenhanced short tau inversion recovery (STIR), T2-weighted (T2-w) TSE, and SHU 555 A-enhanced T2-w turbo spin-echo (TSE) MR imaging and biphasic helical CTAP. The standard of reference was histopathologic analysis of resected specimens in 59 lesions, intraoperative ultrasound with biopsy in 20 lesions, and CT-guided biopsy and follow-up in 12 lesions. Diagnostic performance of the imaging modalities was compared quantitatively and qualitatively by assessing lesion involvement in liver segments. There were 68 lesions detected on unenhanced T2-w TSE, which resulted in a sensitivity of 75%. With the STIR sequence, 76 lesions were detected, for a sensitivity of 84%, and with SHU 555 A-enhanced MRI, 84 lesions were detected, for a sensitivity of 92%. CTAP detected 88 lesions, for a sensitivity of 97%. The accuracy for unenhanced T2-w TSE was 98%, for STIR 99%, for enhanced-MRI 100%, and for CTAP 95%. The specificity was 100% for SHU 555 A-enhanced MRI and 95% for CTAP. SHU 555 A-enhanced MRI was superior to nonenhanced MRI (P < 0.05) and equivalent to CTAP in terms of sensitivity. Due to the absence of false-positive results on SHU 555 A-enhanced MRI, the specificity and accuracy of enhanced MRI were higher than those of CTAP, but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.134).
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiology, University of Vienna, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. ahmed ba-ssalamah@univie.ac.at
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Ba-Ssalamah
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Heinz-Peer
authors.forename: W
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Schima
authors.forename: N
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Schibany
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Schick
authors.forename: R W
authors.initials: RW
authors.lastname: Prokesch
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Kaider
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Teleky
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Wrba
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Lechner
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D016001:Confidence Intervals; D003287:Contrast Media; D003911:Dextrans; D005260:Female; D052203:Ferrosoferric Oxide; D006801:Humans; D007089:Image Enhancement / Q000379:methods*; D007501:Iron; D008099:Liver / Q000473:pathology*; D008113:Liver Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000473:pathology; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000379:methods*; D058185:Magnetite Nanoparticles; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010087:Oxides; D011169:Portal Vein / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology; D011336:Probability; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods*
chemical_list: D003287:Contrast Media; D003911:Dextrans; D058185:Magnetite Nanoparticles; D010087:Oxides; D007501:Iron; C065507:ferumoxides; D052203:Ferrosoferric Oxide