Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading  Processing Request

Gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for the detection of liver metastases from melanoma.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read Online Read More Add to Saved list
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: Public Library of Science Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101285081 Publication Model: eCollection Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1932-6203 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 19326203 NLM ISO Abbreviation: PLoS One Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Original Publication: San Francisco, CA : Public Library of Science
    • Subject Terms:
      Melanoma*/diagnostic imaging ; Melanoma*/pathology ; Liver Neoplasms*/secondary ; Liver Neoplasms*/diagnostic imaging ; Gadolinium DTPA* ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging*/methods ; Contrast Media*; Humans ; Female ; Male ; Aged ; Middle Aged ; Retrospective Studies ; Adult ; Sensitivity and Specificity
    • Abstract:
      Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
      Purpose: We aimed to assess imaging findings and detection sensitivity for melanoma liver metastases on gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
      Methods: This retrospective study included patients with melanoma liver metastasis who underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI. Two abdominal radiologists independently evaluated signal characteristics of liver metastases on morphologic imaging (precontrast T1- and T2-weighted imaging), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), dynamic imaging, and hepatobiliary phase (HBP). Imaging findings were compared according to detection on HBP and the primary site of the melanoma using logistic regression with the generalized estimating equation (GEE). Detection sensitivity for metastases was compared among different MR imaging sets using logistic regression with GEE.
      Results: A total of 67 patients with 254 liver metastases were included (44 women; mean age ± standard deviation, 65.6 ± 13.0 years). On HBP, 76.0% of metastases were detected, and 55.5% (141/254) showed hypointensity. Most of the metastases that were not detected on HBP originated from ocular melanomas (98.4%, 60/61), ≤1 cm (90.2%, 55/61) and showed T1 hyperintensity (98.4%, 60/61). Metastases from non-ocular melanomas more frequently showed T1 hypointensity, T2 hyperintensity, diffusion restriction, arterial enhancement, and HBP hypointensity than those from ocular melanomas (Ps ≤ 0.019). The detection sensitivity of HBP (76.0%) was significantly higher than DWI (65.7%, P = 0.006), but lower than morphologic imaging (98.8%, P < 0.001) and dynamic imaging (97.6%, P < 0.001).
      Conclusion: The detection sensitivity of HBP for melanoma liver metastasis was 76.0%, which was lower than that of morphologic or dynamic imaging. HBP of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI has little advantage in detecting melanoma liver metastases.
      (Copyright: © 2024 Chung et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)
    • References:
      Eur J Radiol. 2005 May;54(2):264-70. (PMID: 15837408)
      Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009 Nov;35(11):1192-7. (PMID: 19329272)
      Eur Radiol. 2019 Jun;29(6):3183-3191. (PMID: 30645669)
      Eur Radiol. 2013 Aug;23(8):2187-96. (PMID: 23519439)
      Eur Radiol. 2015 Aug;25(8):2263-73. (PMID: 25712144)
      Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2016 Dec;37(6):533-548. (PMID: 27986172)
      Abdom Radiol (NY). 2020 Feb;45(2):384-392. (PMID: 31392396)
      Eur J Cancer. 2022 Jul;170:236-255. (PMID: 35570085)
      Eye (Lond). 2023 Apr;37(5):894-899. (PMID: 35945341)
      Arch Ophthalmol. 2009 May;127(5):628-32. (PMID: 19433711)
      Eur Radiol. 2021 Mar;31(3):1359-1366. (PMID: 32886204)
      Insights Imaging. 2015 Dec;6(6):707-17. (PMID: 26334521)
      Br J Radiol. 2016 Sep;89(1065):20160092. (PMID: 27168029)
      AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003 Sep;181(3):809-17. (PMID: 12933487)
      Eur J Cancer. 2006 Feb;42(3):342-50. (PMID: 16364631)
      Br J Ophthalmol. 2019 Sep;103(9):1266-1271. (PMID: 30381389)
      Radiology. 2015 Mar;274(3):712-22. (PMID: 25286324)
      Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2007 Apr;37(4):282-6. (PMID: 17553818)
      Invest Radiol. 2005 Dec;40(12):743-53. (PMID: 16304476)
      Arch Ophthalmol. 2011 Dec;129(12):1576-82. (PMID: 22159677)
      Abdom Radiol (NY). 2021 May;46(5):2219-2235. (PMID: 33135115)
      BMC Gastroenterol. 2019 Jul 24;19(1):129. (PMID: 31340755)
      Eur Radiol. 2013 Dec;23(12):3466-76. (PMID: 23884300)
      Eur J Radiol. 2012 Apr;81(4):714-8. (PMID: 21353412)
      Eur J Radiol. 2019 Dec;121:108688. (PMID: 31704599)
    • Accession Number:
      0 (gadolinium ethoxybenzyl DTPA)
      K2I13DR72L (Gadolinium DTPA)
      0 (Contrast Media)
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20241104 Date Completed: 20241104 Latest Revision: 20241106
    • Publication Date:
      20250114
    • Accession Number:
      PMC11534211
    • Accession Number:
      10.1371/journal.pone.0313212
    • Accession Number:
      39495777