Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Predictive factors of truncation artifacts in the arterial phase of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI: a nationwide multicenter study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Japanese Journal of Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 04 February 2021

This article has been updated

Abstract

Purpose

To identify predictive factors for truncation artifacts (TAs) in the arterial phase of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI in a multicenter study in Japan.

Materials and methods

Data on patient factors (age, sex, weight, presence of viral hepatitis, and other conditions) and imaging parameters (e.g., triggering, voxel size, matrix, k-space ordering, acquisition time, reduction factor, flip angle, fat suppression, field strength, injection rate, and saline volume) were obtained. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate the correlation of these parameters.

Results

We evaluated 1444 patients from 43 institutions who were scanned using GE, Siemens, Philips, or Toshiba MRI equipment (501, 354, 349, and 240 patients, respectively). The total incidence of TAs was 12.5% (17.2, 3.6, 15.7, and 12.1%, respectively). The matrix [odds ratio (OR) 0.13], flip angle (OR 5.77), use of fat suppression (OR 0.106), and field strength (OR 0.092) used in the Philips equipment significantly increased the incidence of TAs in MRI examination.

Conclusions

The incidence of TAs in the arterial phase is influenced by several patient factors and imaging parameters. Especially, Siemens and Toshiba equipment had a significantly lower frequency of TAs. This indicates that such vendor-specific technology used in the dynamic sequence may have a TA-resistant effect.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 04 February 2021

    In the original publication of this paper, results section has been mistakenly published without consistency with Tables.

Abbreviations

CI:

Confidence interval

Gd-EOB-DTPA:

Gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid

HBV:

Hepatitis B virus

HCV:

Hepatitis C virus

OR:

Odds ratio

TA:

Truncation artifact

References

  1. Kudo M. Will Gd-EOB-MRI change the diagnostic algorithm in hepatocellular carcinoma? Oncology. 2010;78:87–93. https://doi.org/10.1159/000315235.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Fowler KJ, Brown JJ, Narra VR. Magnetic resonance imaging of focal liver lesions: approach to imaging diagnosis. Hepatology. 2011;54:2227–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.24679.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tang A, Bashir MR, Corwin MT, Cruite I, Dietrich CF, Do RKG, Ehman EC, Fowler KJ, Hussain HK, Jha RC, Karam AR, Mamidipalli A, Marks RM, Mitchell DG, Ohliger MA, Morgan TA, Shah A, Vu KN, Sirlin CB. Evidence supporting LI-RADS major features for CT- and MR imaging-based diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review. Radiology. 2018;286:29–48. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017170554.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mitchell DG, Bruix J, Sherman M, Sirlin CB. LI-RADS (Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System): summary, discussion, and consensus of the LI-RADS Management Working Group and future directions. Hepatology. 2015;61:1056–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.27304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Elsayes KM, Hooker JC, Agrons MM, Kielar AZ, Tang A, Fowler KJ, Chernyak V, Bashir MR, Kono Y, Do RK, Mitchell DG, Kamaya A, Hecht EM, Sirlin CB. 2017 Version of LI-RADS for CT and MR imaging: an update. Radiographics. 2017;37:1994–2017. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2017170098.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. van der Pol CB, Lim CS, Sirlin CB, McGrath TA, Salameh JP, Bashir MR, Tang A, Singal AG, Costa AF, Fowler K, McInnes MDF. Accuracy of the liver imaging reporting and data system in computed tomography and magnetic resonance image analysis of hepatocellular carcinoma or overall malignancy-a systematic review. Gastroenterology. 2019;156:976–86. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2018.11.020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Davenport MS, Caoili EM, Kaza RK, Hussain HK. Matched within-patient cohort study of transient arterial phase respiratory motion-related artifact in MR imaging of the liver: Gadoxetate disodium versus gadobenate dimeglumine. Radiology. 2014;272:123–31. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14132269.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bashir MR, Castelli P, Davenport MS, Larson D, Marin D, Hussain HK, Jaffe TA. Respiratory motion artifact affecting hepatic arterial phase MR imaging with gadoxetate disodium is more common in patients with a prior episode of arterial phase motion associated with gadoxetate disodium. Radiology. 2015;274:141–8. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14132269.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Pietryga JA, Burke LM, Marin D, Jaffe TA, Bashir MR. Respiratory motion artifact affecting hepatic arterial phase imaging with gadoxetate disodium: examination recovery with a multiple arterial phase acquisition. Radiology. 2014;271:426–34. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13131988.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ikeno H, Kobayashi S, Kozaka K, Ogi T, Inoue D, Yoneda N, Yoshida K, Ohno N, Gabata T, Kitao A. Relationship between the degree of abdominal wall movement and the image quality of contrast-enhanced MRI: semi-quantitative study especially focused on the occurrence of transient severe motion artifact. Jpn J Radiol. 2020;38:165–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-019-00896-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Motosugi U, Takehara Y. Motion and solution in hepatobiliary agent-enhanced dynamic MRI: solid evidence and unanswered question. Jpn J Radiol. 2020;38:99–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-019-00900-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Motosugi U, Ichikawa T, Sou H, Sano K, Ichikawa S, Tominaga L, Araki T. Dilution method of gadolinium ethoxybenzyl diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). J Magn Reson Imaging. 2009;30:849–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21913.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Haradome H, Grazioli L, Tsunoo M, Tinti R, Frittoli B, Gambarini S, Morone M, Motosugi U, Colagrande S. Can MR fluoroscopic triggering technique and slow rate injection provide appropriate arterial phase images with reducing artifacts on gadoxetic acid-DTPA (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced hepatic MR imaging? J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010;32:334–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.22241.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Concato J, Feinstein AR. Monte Carlo methods in clinical research: applications in multivariable analysis. J Investig Med. 1997;45:394–400.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tamada T, Ito K, Sone T, Yamamoto A, Yoshida K, Kakuba K, Tanimoto D, Higashi H, Yamashita T. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of abdominal solid organ and major vessel: comparison of enhancement effect between Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-DTPA. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2009;29:636–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21689.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kim YK, Lin WC, Sung K, Raman SS, Margolis D, Lim Y, Gu S, Lu D. Reducing artifacts during arterial phase of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced mr imaging: dilution method versus reduced injection rate. Radiology. 2017;283:429–37. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016160241.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tamada T, Ito K, Yoshida K, Kanki A, Higaki A, Tanimoto D, Higashi H. Comparison of three different injection methods for arterial phase of Gd-EOB-DTPA enhanced MR imaging of the liver. Eur J Radiol. 2011;80:e284–e288288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.12.082.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tanimoto A, Higuchi N, Ueno A. Reduction of ringing artifacts in the arterial phase of gadoxetic acid-enhanced dynamic MR imaging. Magn Reson Med Sci. 2012;11:91–7. https://doi.org/10.2463/mrms.11.91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Svensson J, Petersson JS, Ståhlberg F, Larsson EM, Leander P, Olsson LE. Image artifacts due to a time-varying contrast medium concentration in 3D contrast-enhanced MRA. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;10:919–28.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Kindai University, 377-2, Ohnohigashi, Osaka-sayama, Osaka, 589-8511, Japan

    Masakatsu Tsurusaki & Kazunari Ishii

  2. Department of Radiology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Hyogo, Japan

    Keitaro Sofue & Takamichi Murakami

  3. Department of Radiology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Osaka, Japan

    Hiromitsu Onishi

  4. Department of Radiology, Gifu University Graduate School of Medicine, Gifu, Gifu, Japan

    Satoshi Goshima

  5. Department of Radiology, Kawasaki Medical School, Kurashiki, Okayama, Japan

    Atsushi Higaki

  6. Department of Radiology, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Kyoto, Japan

    Hiroyoshi Isoda

  7. Department of Radiology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, Sagamihara, Kanagawa, Japan

    Hiroki Haradome

Authors
  1. Masakatsu Tsurusaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Keitaro Sofue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hiromitsu Onishi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Satoshi Goshima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Atsushi Higaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hiroyoshi Isoda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Hiroki Haradome
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Kazunari Ishii
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Takamichi Murakami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Guarantors of integrity of entire study: MT and TM. Study concepts/study design or data acquisition or data analysis/interpretation: all authors. Manuscript drafting or manuscript revision for important intellectual content: all authors. Approval of final version of submitted manuscript: all authors. Agrees to ensure any questions related to the work are appropriately resolved: all authors. Literature research: MT and KS. Clinical studies: all authors. Statistical analysis: MT. Manuscript editing: MT, KS, KI, and TM.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Masakatsu Tsurusaki.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

MT, KS, HO, SG, AH, HI, HH, KI, and TM have no disclosures and funding.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 89 kb)

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tsurusaki, M., Sofue, K., Onishi, H. et al. Predictive factors of truncation artifacts in the arterial phase of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI: a nationwide multicenter study. Jpn J Radiol 39, 165–177 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-020-01052-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-020-01052-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation