MDCT versus MRI assessment of tumor response after transarterial chemoembolization for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma.
The purpose of this study was to compare the ability of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to evaluate treatment results after transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), with a special focus on the influence of Lipiodol on calculation of tumor necrosis according to EASL criteria. A total of 115 nodules in 20 patients (17 males, 3 females; 69.5 +/- 9.35 years) with biopsy-proven hepatocellular carcinoma were treated with TACE. Embolization was performed using a doxorubicin-Lipiodol emulsion (group I) or DC Beads loaded with doxorubicin (group II). Follow-up included triphasic contrast-enhanced 64-row MDCT (collimation, 0.625 mm; slice, 3 mm; contrast bolus, 120 ml iomeprol; delay by bolus trigger) and contrast-enhanced MRI (T1 native, T2 native; five dynamic contrast-enhanced phases; 0.1 mmol/kg body weight gadolinium-DTPA; slice thickness, 4 mm). Residual tumor and the extent of tumor necrosis were evaluated according to EASL. Contrast enhancement within tumor lesions was suspected to represent vital tumor. In the Lipiodol-based TACE protocol, MDCT underestimated residual viable tumor compared to MRI, due to Lipiodol artifacts (23.2% vs 47.7% after first, 11.9% vs 31.2% after second, and 11.4% vs 23.7% after third TACE; p = 0.0014, p < 0.001, and p < 0.001, respectively). In contrast to MDCT, MRI was completely free of any artifacts caused by Lipiodol. In the DC Bead-based Lipiodol-free TACE protocol, MRI and CT showed similar residual tumor and rating of treatment results (46.4% vs 41.2%, 31.9 vs 26.8%, and 26.0% vs 25.6%; n.s.). In conclusion, MRI is superior to MDCT for detection of viable tumor residuals after Lipiodol-based TACE. Since viable tumor tissue is superimposed by Lipiodol artifacts in MDCT, MRI is mandatory for reliable decision-making during follow-up after Lipiodol-based TACE protocols.
Kloeckner
Roman
R
Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Johannes Gutenberg-University of Mainz, Langenbeckstrasse 1, 55131 Mainz, Germany. Roman.Kloeckner@googlemail.com
Otto
Gerd
G
Biesterfeld
Stefan
S
Oberholzer
Katja
K
Dueber
Christoph
C
Pitton
Michael B
MB
D000368:Aged; D000964:Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic / Q000008:administration & dosage; D016477:Artifacts; D006528:Carcinoma, Hepatocellular / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology / Q000628:therapy*; D016461:Chemoembolization, Therapeutic / Q000379:methods*; D003287:Contrast Media / Q000008:administration & dosage; D004317:Doxorubicin / Q000008:administration & dosage; D004655:Emulsions; D005260:Female; D019786:Gadolinium DTPA; D006801:Humans; D007459:Iodized Oil / Q000627:therapeutic use; D007479:Iopamidol / Q000031:analogs & derivatives; D016014:Linear Models; D008113:Liver Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology / Q000628:therapy*; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000379:methods*; D008297:Male; D009336:Necrosis; D011446:Prospective Studies; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods*; D016896:Treatment Outcome
D000964:Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic; D003287:Contrast Media; D004655:Emulsions; C057937:iomeprol; D007459:Iodized Oil; D004317:Doxorubicin; D007479:Iopamidol; D019786:Gadolinium DTPA