Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13131988

Use of single-breath-hold triple arterial phase acquisition in abdominal MR imaging with gadoxetate disodium provides adequate image quality in most arterial phases that might otherwise have been compromised by transient severe motion.

Purpose

To determine whether the use of a multiple arterial phase imaging technique provides adequate image quality in patients experiencing transient severe motion (TSM) in the arterial phase on abdominal magnetic resonance (MR) images obtained with gadoxetate disodium.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board and was compliant with HIPAA. The requirement to obtain informed consent was waived. Five hundred forty-nine consecutive MR examinations were evaluated, 345 performed with gadoxetate disodium and 204 performed with gadobenate dimeglumine. All examinations included single-breath-hold triple arterial phase acquisition. Five radiologists blinded to the contrast material rated motion on a scale of 1 (no motion) to 5 (nondiagnostic images) for the precontrast phase, the three arterial phases, the portal venous phase, and the late dynamic phase. Adequacy of late hepatic arterial timing was also rated for the each of the three arterial phases. Mean motion scores were compared by using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. The number of patients with TSM, as well as the number of those with “adequate” arterial phases, was compared with the χ2 or Fisher exact test, as appropriate.

Results

Mean motion scores in all three arterial phases in the gadoxetate disodium cohort were significantly worse than those in the gadobenate dimeglumine cohort (P < .005). TSM occurred at a higher rate with gadoxetate disodium than with gadobenate dimeglumine (10.7% [37 of 345 examinations] vs 0.5% [one of 204 examinations], P < .001). However, 30 of 37 examinations affected by TSM had at least one well-timed arterial phase with a mean motion score of 3 or less and were thus considered adequate.

Conclusion

Use of single-breath-hold multiple arterial phase acquisition in abdominal MR imaging with gadoxetate disodium recovers most arterial phases that would otherwise have been compromised by transient motion.

© RSNA, 2014

References

  • 1. Berland LL, Silverman SG, Gore RM, et al. Managing incidental findings on abdominal CT: white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee. J Am Coll Radiol 2010;7(10):754–773. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 2. Elsayes KM, Narra VR, Yin Y, Mukundan G, Lammle M, Brown JJ. Focal hepatic lesions: diagnostic value of enhancement pattern approach with contrast-enhanced 3D gradient-echo MR imaging. RadioGraphics 2005;25(5):1299–1320. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 3. Chung YE, Kim MJ, Kim YE, Park MS, Choi JY, Kim KW. Characterization of incidental liver lesions: comparison of multidetector CT versus Gd-EOB-DTPA–enhanced MR imaging. PLoS ONE 2013;8(6):e66141. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 4. Danet IM, Semelka RC, Leonardou P, et al. Spectrum of MRI appearances of untreated metastases of the liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181(3):809–817. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 5. Muhi A, Ichikawa T, Motosugi U, et al. Diagnosis of colorectal hepatic metastases: comparison of contrast-enhanced CT, contrast-enhanced US, superparamagnetic iron oxide–enhanced MRI, and gadoxetic acid–enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011;34(2):326–335. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 6. Bashir MR, Husarik DB, Ziemlewicz TJ, Gupta RT, Boll DT, Merkle EM. Liver MRI in the hepatocyte phase with gadolinium-EOB-DTPA: does increasing the flip angle improve conspicuity and detection rate of hypointense lesions? J Magn Reson Imaging 2012;35(3):611–616. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 7. Grazioli L, Bondioni MP, Haradome H, et al. Hepatocellular adenoma and focal nodular hyperplasia: value of gadoxetic acid–enhanced MR imaging in differential diagnosis. Radiology 2012;262(2):520–529. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 8. Hyodo T, Murakami T, Imai Y, et al. Hypovascular nodules in patients with chronic liver disease: risk factors for development of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiology 2013;266(2):480–490. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 9. Mohajer K, Frydrychowicz A, Robbins JB, Loeffler AG, Reed TD, Reeder SB. Characterization of hepatic adenoma and focal nodular hyperplasia with gadoxetic acid. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012;36(3):686–696. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 10. Motosugi U, Ichikawa T, Morisaka H, et al. Detection of pancreatic carcinoma and liver metastases with gadoxetic acid–enhanced MR imaging: comparison with contrast-enhanced multi–detector row CT. Radiology 2011;260(2):446–453. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 11. Chen L, Zhang J, Zhang L, et al. Meta-analysis of gadoxetic acid disodium (Gd-EOB-DTPA)–enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of liver metastases. PLoS ONE 2012;7(11):e48681. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 12. Chung WS, Kim MJ, Chung YE, et al. Comparison of gadoxetic acid–enhanced dynamic imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging for the preoperative evaluation of colorectal liver metastases. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011;34(2):345–353. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 13. Zech CJ, Herrmann KA, Reiser MF, Schoenberg SO. MR imaging in patients with suspected liver metastases: value of liver-specific contrast agent Gd-EOB-DTPA. Magn Reson Med Sci 2007;6(1):43–52. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 14. Di Martino M, Marin D, Guerrisi A, et al. Intraindividual comparison of gadoxetate disodium–enhanced MR imaging and 64-section multidetector CT in the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis. Radiology 2010;256(3):806–816. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 15. Bashir MR, Gupta RT, Davenport MS, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma in a North American population: does hepatobiliary MR imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA improve sensitivity and confidence for diagnosis? J Magn Reson Imaging 2013;37(2):398–406. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 16. Davenport MS, Viglianti BL, Al-Hawary MM, et al. Comparison of acute transient dyspnea after intravenous administration of gadoxetate disodium and gadobenate dimeglumine: effect on arterial phase image quality. Radiology 2013;266(2):452–461. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 17. Bartolozzi C, Battaglia V, Bargellini I, et al. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of 102 nodules in cirrhosis: correlation with histological findings on explanted livers. Abdom Imaging 2013;38(2):290–296. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 18. Morana G, Grazioli L, Kirchin MA, et al. Solid hypervascular liver lesions: accurate identification of true benign lesions on enhanced dynamic and hepatobiliary phase magnetic resonance imaging after gadobenate dimeglumine administration. Invest Radiol 2011;46(4):225–239. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 19. Hussain SM, Reinhold C, Mitchell DG. Cirrhosis and lesion characterization at MR imaging. RadioGraphics 2009;29(6):1637–1652. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 20. Ringe KI, Husarik DB, Sirlin CB, Merkle EM. Gadoxetate disodium–enhanced MRI of the liver. I. Protocol optimization and lesion appearance in the noncirrhotic liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195(1):13–28. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 21. Cruite I, Schroeder M, Merkle EM, Sirlin CB. Gadoxetate disodium–enhanced MRI of the liver. II. Protocol optimization and lesion appearance in the cirrhotic liver. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195(1):29–41. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 22. Feuerlein S, Boll DT, Gupta RT, Ringe KI, Marin D, Merkle EM. Gadoxetate disodium–enhanced hepatic MRI: dose-dependent contrast dynamics of hepatic parenchyma and portal vein. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196(1):W18–W24. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 23. Michaely HJ, Morelli JN, Budjan J, et al. CAIPIRINHA-Dixon-TWIST (CDT)–volume-interpolated breath-hold examination (VIBE): a new technique for fast time-resolved dynamic 3-dimensional imaging of the abdomen with high spatial resolution. Invest Radiol 2013;48(8):590–597. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 24. Sharma P, Kalb B, Kitajima HD, et al. Optimization of single injection liver arterial phase gadolinium enhanced MRI using bolus track real-time imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011;33(1):110–118. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 25. Macovski A. Noise in MRI. Magn Reson Med 1996;36(3):494–497. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 26. Agrawal MD, Spincemaille P, Mennitt KW, et al. Improved hepatic arterial phase MRI with 3-second temporal resolution. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013;37(5):1129–1136. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 27. Mistretta CA. Undersampled radial MR acquisition and highly constrained back projection (HYPR) reconstruction: potential medical imaging applications in the post-Nyquist era. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009;29(3):501–516. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 28. Wang K, Busse RF, Holmes JH, et al. Interleaved variable density sampling with a constrained parallel imaging reconstruction for dynamic contrast-enhanced MR angiography. Magn Reson Med 2011;66(2):428–436. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

Article History

Received August 23, 2013; revision requested September 30; revision received October 7; final version accepted October 24.
Published online: Jan 21 2014
Published in print: May 2014