Conspicuity of liver hemangiomas: Short tau inversion recovery, T1, and T2 imaging with gadolinium ethoxybenzyl diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid

Autor: Glenn A. Tung, Leah Schafer, Jeffrey M. Brody, Kohkan Shamsi, Josy Breuer
Rok vydání: 2005
Předmět:
Zdroj: Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 21:391-397
ISSN: 1522-2586
1053-1807
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.20289
Popis: Purpose To compare conspicuity of liver hemangiomas on STIR, T1-weighted, and T2-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) images before and after administration of gadolinium ethoxybenzyl diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA) (hepatocellular contrast agent), using contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs). Materials and Methods Thirteen hemangiomas were imaged using breath-hold gradient echo (GRE) T1, fat-saturated turbo spin echo (TSE)-T2, and short tau inversion recovery (STIR) sequences. Background noise and signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) for liver and hemangioma, along with CNR for normal liver and hemangioma, were measured on each sequence before and after administration of Gd-EOB-DTPA. Hemangioma conspicuity was also evaluated qualitatively. Results After Gd-EOB-DTPA administration, the quantitative liver SNR decreased 54% on STIR, increased 45% on T1-weighted images, and increased 14.5% on TSE-T2-weighted images. The CNR for liver and hemangioma increased 50% on STIR images (P < 0.0001), increased 46% on T1-weighted imaging (P = 0.0033), and increased 22% on TSE-T2-weighted MR imaging (MRI) (P = 0.0083). After contrast, the CNR for TSE-T2 images was greater than those for both the T1 and STIR images (P < 0.0001 for both). Qualitatively, signal change was visually apparent in the liver on T1 and STIR, but not on T2 images or in the hemangiomas on any sequence. Conclusion Despite the statistically significant T1 and STIR increase in CNR, liver hemangiomas were most conspicuous on TSE-T2 images after Gd-EOB-DTPA. This pilot study with hemangiomas highlights the newly recognized potential benefit of TSE-T2 imaging with hepatocellular contrast. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2005;21:391–397. © 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Databáze: OpenAIRE