View Item 

Show simple item record

MRI characterization of 124 CT-indeterminate focal hepatic lesions: evaluation of clinical utility
dc.contributor.authorElsayes, Khaled M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorLeyendecker, John R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMenias, Christine O.en_US
dc.contributor.authorOliveira, Erica P.en_US
dc.contributor.authorNarra, Vamsidhar R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorChapman, William C.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHassanien, Moataz H.en_US
dc.contributor.authorElsharkawy, Mohamed S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBrown, Jeffrey J.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-01T22:08:49Z
dc.date.available2010-06-01T22:08:49Z
dc.date.issued2007-06en_US
dc.identifier.citationELSAYES, KHALED M.; LEYENDECKER, JOHN R.; MENIAS, CHRISTINE O.; OLIVEIRA, ERICA P.; NARRA, VAMSIDHAR R.; CHAPMAN, WILLIAM C.; HASSANIEN, MOATAZ H.; ELSHARKAWY, MOHAMED S.; BROWN, JEFFREY J. (2007). "MRI characterization of 124 CT-indeterminate focal hepatic lesions: evaluation of clinical utility." HPB 9(3): 208-215. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/75168>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1365-182Xen_US
dc.identifier.issn1477-2574en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/75168
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=18333224&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractObjective. To evaluate the diagnostic yield of MRI performed for characterization of focal hepatic lesions that are interpreted as indeterminate on CT. Patients and methods. In a retrospective investigation, 124 indeterminate focal hepatic lesions in 96 patients were identified on CT examinations over 5 years from 1997 to 2001. All patients had MRI performed for the liver within 6 weeks of their CT examination. CT and MR images were reviewed independently by two separate groups of two radiologists. The value of MRI in characterizing these lesions was assessed. Diagnoses were confirmed based on histology, characteristic imaging features, and clinical follow-up . Results. MRI definitely characterized 73 lesions (58%) that were indeterminate on CT. MRI was accurate in 72/73 of these lesions. MRI could not definitely characterize 51 lesions (42%). Ten lesions were not visualized on MRI, and follow-up imaging confirmed that no lesion was present in eight of these cases (pseudolesions). Conclusion. MRI is valuable for the characterization of indeterminate focal hepatic lesions detected on CT.en_US
dc.format.extent279199 bytes
dc.format.extent3109 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.rights2007 Taylor & Francisen_US
dc.subject.otherFocal Hepatic Lesionsen_US
dc.subject.otherMRIen_US
dc.subject.otherCTen_US
dc.titleMRI characterization of 124 CT-indeterminate focal hepatic lesions: evaluation of clinical utilityen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelSurgery and Anesthesiologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan Health Center, Ann Arbor, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Radiology, Theodore Bilharz Institute, Giza, Egypten_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Radiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicineen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University in St Louis, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Surgery, Washington University in St Louis, USAen_US
dc.identifier.pmid18333224en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/75168/1/13651820701216950.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/13651820701216950en_US
dc.identifier.sourceHPBen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHussain HK, Syed I, Nghiem HV, Johnson TD, Carlos RC, Weadock WJ, et al. T2-weighted MR imaging in the assessment of cirrhotic liver. Radiology 2004; 230: 637 – 44.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSemelka RC, Shoenut JP, Kroeker MA, Greenberg HM, Simm FC, Minuk GY, et al. Focal liver disease: comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced CT and T2-weighted fat-suppressed, FLASH, and dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging at 1.5 T. Radiology 1992; 184: 687 – 94.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHussain HK, Londy FJ, Francis IR, Nghiem HV, Weadock WJ, Gebremariam A, et al. Hepatic arterial phase MR imaging with automated bolus-detection three-dimensional fast gradient-recalled-echo sequence: comparison with test-bolus method. Radiology 2003; 226: 558 – 66.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarlos RC, Kim HM, Hussain HK, Francis IR, Nghiem HV, Fendrick AM. Developing a prediction rule to assess hepatic malignancy in patients with cirrhosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180: 893 – 900.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIto K, Mitchell DG, Outwater EK. Hepatic lesions: discrimination of nonsolid, benign lesions from solid, malignant lesions with heavily T2-weighted fast spin-echo MR imaging. Radiology 1997; 204: 729 – 37.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCittadini G, Santacroce E, Giasotto V, Rescinito G. Focal liver lesions: characterization with quantitative analysis of T2 relaxation time in TSE sequence with double echo time. Radiol Med (Torino) 2004; 107: 166 – 73.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMastropasqua M, Kanematsu M, Leonardou P, Braga L, Woosley JT, Semelka RC. Cavernous hemangiomas in patients with chronic liver disease: MR imaging findings. Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 22: 15 – 18.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOudkerk M, Torres CG, Song B, Konig M, Grimm J, Fernandez-Cuadrado J, et al. Characterization of liver lesions with mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced MR imaging: multicenter study comparing MR and dual-phase spiral CT. Radiology 2002; 223: 517 – 24.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceReimer P, Jahnke N, Fiebich M, Schima W, Deckers F, Marx C, et al. Hepatic lesion detection and characterization: value of nonenhanced MR imaging, superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced MR imaging, and spiral CT-ROC analysis. Radiology 2000; 217: 152 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSemelka RC, Martin DR, Balci C, Lance T. Focal liver lesions: comparison of dual-phase CT and multisequence multiplanar MR imaging including dynamic gadolinium enhancement. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001; 13: 397 – 401.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYoshida H, Itai Y, Ohtomo K, Kokubo T, Minami M, Yashiro N. Small hepatocellular carcinoma and cavernous hemangioma: differentiation with dynamic FLASH MR imaging with Gd-DTPA. Radiology 1989; 171: 339 – 42.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHamm B, Fischer E, Taupitz M. Differentiation of hepatic hemangiomas from metastases by dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1990; 14: 205 – 16.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceReimer P, Rummeny EJ, Wissing M, Bongartz GM, Schuierer G, Peters PE. Hepatic MR imaging: comparison of RARE derived sequences with conventional sequences for detection and characterization of focal liver lesions. Abdom Imaging 1996; 21: 427 – 32.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMirowitz SA, Lee JK, Gutierrez E, Brown JJ, Heiken JP, Eilenberg SS. Dynamic gadolinium-enhanced rapid acquisition spin-echo MR imaging of the liver. Radiology 1991; 179: 371 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMurakami T, Mitani T, Nakamura H, Hori S, Marukawa T, Nakanishi K, et al. Differentiation between hepatoma and hemangioma with inversion-recovery snapshot FLASH MRI and Gd-DTPA. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1992; 16: 198 – 205.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIto K, Choji T, Nakada T, Nakanishi T, Kurokawa F, Okita K. Multislice dynamic MRI of hepatic tumors. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993; 17: 390 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWhitney WS, Herfkens RJ, Jeffrey RB, McDonnell CH, Ki KC, Van Dalsem WJ, et al. Dynamic breath-hold multiplanar spoiled gradient-recalled MR imaging with gadolinium enhancement for differentiating hepatic hemangiomas from malignancies at 1.5 T. Radiology 1993; 189: 863 – 870.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHamm B, Thoeni RF, Gould RG, Bernardino ME, Luning M, Saini S, et al. Focal liver lesions: characterization with nonenhanced and dynamic contrast material-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1994; 190: 417 – 23.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMitchell DG, Saini S, Weinreb J, De Lange EE, Runge VM, Kuhlman JE, et al. Hepatic metastases and cavernous hemangiomas: distinction with standard- and triple-dose gadoteridol-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 1994; 193: 49 – 57.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceQuillin SP, Atilla S, Brown JJ, Borrello JJ, Yu CY, Pilgram TK. Characterization of focal hepatic masses by dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging: findings in 311 lesions. Magn Reson Imaging 1997; 15: 275 – 85.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFujita T, Ito K, Honjo K, Okazaki H, Matsumoto T, Matsunaga N. Detection of hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of T2-weighted breath-hold fast spin-echo sequences and high-resolution dynamic MR imaging with a phased-array body coil. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 9: 274 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTello R, Fenlon HM, Gagliano T, de Carvalho VL, Yucel EK. Prediction rule for characterization of hepatic lesions revealed on MR imaging: estimation of malignancy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 176: 879 – 84.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFenlon HM, Tello R, deCarvalho VL, Yucel EK. Signal characteristics of focal liver lesions on double echo T2-weighted conventional spin echo MRI: observer performance versus quantitative measurements of T2 relaxation times. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2000; 24: 204 – 11.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSemelka RC, Brown ED, Ascher SM, Pott RH, Bagley AS, Li W, et al. Hepatic hemangiomas: a multi-institutional study of appearance on T2-weighted and serial gadolinium-enhanced gradient-echo MR images. Radiology 1994; 192: 401 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceItoh K, Saini S, Hahn PF, Imam N, Ferrucci JT. Differentiation between small hepatic hemangiomas and metastases on MR images: importance of size-specific quantitative criteria. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990; 155: 61 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrown JJ, Lee JM, Lee JK, Van Lom KJ, Malchow SC. Focal hepatic lesions: differentiation with MR imaging at 0.5 T. Radiology 1991; 179: 675 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcFarland EG, Mayo-Smith WW, Saini S, Hahn PF, Goldberg MA, Lee MJ. Hepatic hemangiomas and malignant tumors: improved differentiation with heavily T2-weighted conventional spin-echo MR imaging. Radiology 1994; 193: 43 – 7.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchima W, Saini S, Echeverri JA, Hahn PE, Harisinghani M, Mueller PR. Focal liver lesions: characterization with conventional spin-echo versus fast spin-echo T2-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 1997; 202: 389 – 93.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCoulam CH, Chan FP, Li KC. Can a multiphasic contrast-enhanced three-dimensional fast spoiled gradient-recalled echo sequence be sufficient for liver MR imaging ?. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 178: 335 – 41.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMatsuo M, Kanematsu M, Itoh K, Ito K, Maetani Y, Kondo H, et al. Detection of malignant hepatic tumors: comparison of gadolinium-and ferumoxide-enhanced MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 177: 637 – 43.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMahfouz AE, Hamm B, Wolf KJ. Peripheral washout: a sign of malignancy on dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR images of focal liver lesions. Radiology 1994; 190: 49 – 52.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSoyer P, Gueye C, Somveille E, Laissy JP, Scherrer A. MR diagnosis of hepatic metastases from neuroendocrine tumors versus hemangiomas: relative merits of dynamic gadolinium chelate-enhanced gradient-recalled echo and unenhanced spin-echo images. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995; 165: 1407 – 13.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMueller GC, Hussain HK, Carlos RC, Nghiem HV, Francis IR. Effectiveness of MR imaging in characterizing small hepatic lesions: routine versus expert interpretation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180: 673 – 80.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLarson RE, Semelka RC, Bagley AS, Molina PL, Brown ED, Lee JK. Hypervascular malignant liver lesions: comparison of various MR imaging pulse sequences and dynamic CT. Radiology 1994; 192: 393 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFleiss JL, Kingman A. Statistical management of data in clinical research. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 1990; 1: 55 – 66.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceYoshimitsu K, Honda H, Kuroiwa T, Irie H, Aibe H, Shinokazi K, et al. Unusual hemodynamics and pseudolesions of the noncirrhotic liver at CT. Radiographics 2001; 21 Spec. No.: S81 – S96.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVilanova JC, Barcelo J, Smirniotopoulos JG, Perez-Andres R, Villalon M, Miro J, et al. Hemangioma from head to toe: MR imaging with pathologic correlation. Radiographics 2004; 24: 367 – 85.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchwartz LH, Gandras EJ, Colangelo SM, Ercolani MC, Panicek DM. Prevalence and importance of small hepatic lesions found at CT in patients with cancer. Radiology 1999; 210: 71 – 4.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJones EC, Chezmar JL, Nelson RC. The frequency and significance of small (less than or equal to 15 mm) hepatic lesions detected by CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992; 158: 535 – 9.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
13651820701216950.pdf
Size:
272.6KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.