Evaluation of hemodynamic imaging findings of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison between dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging using radial volumetric imaging breath-hold examination with k-space-weighted image contrast reconstruction and dynamic computed tomography during hepatic arteriography
- 53 Downloads
To compare the visualization of hemodynamic imaging findings of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) on dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) using radial volumetric imaging breath-hold examination with k-space-weighted image contrast reconstruction (r-VIBE-KWIC) versus dynamic computed tomography during hepatic arteriography (dyn-CTHA).
Materials and methods
We retrospectively reviewed the databases of preoperative DCE-MRI using r-VIBE-KWIC, dyn-CTHA, and postoperative pathology of resected specimens. Fourteen patients with 14 hypervascular HCCs underwent both DCE-MRI and dyn-CTHA. The imaging findings of the tumor and adjacent liver parenchyma were assessed on both modalities by two readers. The tumor enhancement time was also compared between the two modalities.
On DCE-MRI/dyn-CTHA, early staining, peritumoral low-intensity or low-density bands, corona enhancement, and washout of HCC were observed in 14/14 (100%), 10/12 (83%), 11/14 (78%), and 4/14 (29%) patients, respectively. Pathologically, four HCCs with low-density bands on dyn-CTHA had no fibrous capsules. The median tumor enhancement time on DCE-MRI and dyn-CTHA was 24 (9–24) and 23 (8–35) s, respectively. The correlation coefficient between the two groups was 0.762 (P < 0.002).
DCE-MRI using r-VIBE-KWIC has diagnostic potential comparable with that of dyn-CTHA in the hemodynamic evaluation of hypervascular HCC except for the washout phenomenon.
KeywordsDynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging Radial volumetric imaging breath-hold examination (VIBE) with k-space-weighted image contrast reconstruction Dynamic computed tomography during hepatic arteriography Hepatocellular carcinoma
Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging
Volumetric imaging breath-hold examination
k-space-weighted image contrast reconstruction
Dynamic computed tomography during hepatic arteriography
This work was supported partially by a “Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research” (C) (15K09917) from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan. We thank Angela Morben, DVM, ELS, from Edanz Group (www.edanzediting.com/ac) for editing a draft of this manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors of this manuscript declare the relationships with the following companies: Dr. Marcel Dominik Nickel is an employer of Siemens Healthcare GmbH, and Mr. Katsuya Maruyama is an employer of Siemens Healthcare K. K. The authors thank these companies for allowing the use of the prototypical r-VIBE-KWIC for our study. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board of Shinshu University School of Medicine (no. 1981).
- 1.Hayashi M, Matsui O, Ueda K, Kawamori Y, Kadoya M, Yoshikawa J, et al. Correlation between the blood supply and grade of malignancy of hepatocellular nodules associated with liver cirrhosis: evaluation by CT during intraarterial injection of contrast medium. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172(4):969–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Fujinaga Y, Ohya A, Tokoro H, Yamada A, Ueda K, Ueda H, et al. Radial volumetric imaging breath-hold examination (VIBE) with k-space weighted image contrast (KWIC) for dynamic gadoxetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced MRI of the liver: advantages over Cartesian VIBE in the arterial phase. Eur Radiol. 2014;24(6):1290–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 9.Mori K, Yoshioka H, Takahashi N, Yamaguchi M, Ueno T, Yamaki T, et al. Triple arterial phase dynamic MRI with sensitivity encoding for hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of the diagnostic accuracy among the early, middle, late, and whole triple arterial phase imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184(1):63–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar