Diagnostic accuracy of portal-phase CT and MRI with mangafodipir trisodium in detecting liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma

Daniele Regge, D. Campanella, G. C. Anselmetti, S. Cirillo, T. M. Gallo, A. Muratore, L. Capussotti, G. Galatola, I. Floriani, M. Aglietta

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

42 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aim: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of single section spiral computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with tissue-specific contrast agent mangafodipir trisodium (MnDPDP) in the detection of colorectal liver metastases. Material and Methods: One hundred and twenty-five consecutive patients undergoing surgery for primary and/or metastatic disease were evaluated using CT (5 mm collimation and reconstruction interval, pitch 2), two-dimensional fast spoiled gradient echo (2D FSPGR) T1 and single shot fast-spin echo (SSFSE) T2 weighted breath-hold MRI sequences, performed before and after intravenous administration of MnDPDP. The reference standards were intraoperative ultrasound and histology. Results: The per-patient accuracy of CT was 72.8 versus 78.4% for unenhanced MRI (p=0.071) and 82.4% for MnDPDP-enhanced MRI (p=0.005). MnDPDP-enhanced MRI appeared to be more accurate than unenhanced MRI but this was not significant (p=0.059). The sensitivity of CT was 48.4% versus 58.1% for unenhanced MRI (p=0.083) and 66.1% for MnDPDP-enhanced MRI (p=0.004). The difference in specificity between procedures was not significant. The per-lesion sensitivity was 71.7, 74.9 and 82.7% for CT, unenhanced MRI, and MnDPDP-enhanced MRI, respectively; the positive predictive value of the procedures was respectively 84.0, 96.0 and 95.8%. MnDPDP-enhanced MRI provided a high level diagnostic confidence in 92.5% of the cases versus 82.5% for both unenhanced MRI and CT. The kappa value for inter-observer variability was >0.75 for all procedures. Conclusions: The diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity of MnD PDP-enhanced MRI is significantly higher than single section spiral CT in the detection of colorectal cancer liver metastases; no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy was observed between unenhanced MRI and MnDPDP-enhanced MRI.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)338-347
Number of pages10
JournalClinical Radiology
Volume61
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2006

Fingerprint

Colorectal Neoplasms
Tomography
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Neoplasm Metastasis
Liver
Spiral Computed Tomography
N,N'-bis(pyridoxal-5-phosphate)ethylenediamine-N,N'-diacetic acid
Observer Variation
Liver Neoplasms
Intravenous Administration
Contrast Media
Histology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Diagnostic accuracy of portal-phase CT and MRI with mangafodipir trisodium in detecting liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. / Regge, Daniele; Campanella, D.; Anselmetti, G. C.; Cirillo, S.; Gallo, T. M.; Muratore, A.; Capussotti, L.; Galatola, G.; Floriani, I.; Aglietta, M.

In: Clinical Radiology, Vol. 61, No. 4, 04.2006, p. 338-347.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Regge, Daniele ; Campanella, D. ; Anselmetti, G. C. ; Cirillo, S. ; Gallo, T. M. ; Muratore, A. ; Capussotti, L. ; Galatola, G. ; Floriani, I. ; Aglietta, M. / Diagnostic accuracy of portal-phase CT and MRI with mangafodipir trisodium in detecting liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. In: Clinical Radiology. 2006 ; Vol. 61, No. 4. pp. 338-347.
@article{e19f2bcf7be7441d82a164feb58edddc,
title = "Diagnostic accuracy of portal-phase CT and MRI with mangafodipir trisodium in detecting liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma",
abstract = "Aim: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of single section spiral computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with tissue-specific contrast agent mangafodipir trisodium (MnDPDP) in the detection of colorectal liver metastases. Material and Methods: One hundred and twenty-five consecutive patients undergoing surgery for primary and/or metastatic disease were evaluated using CT (5 mm collimation and reconstruction interval, pitch 2), two-dimensional fast spoiled gradient echo (2D FSPGR) T1 and single shot fast-spin echo (SSFSE) T2 weighted breath-hold MRI sequences, performed before and after intravenous administration of MnDPDP. The reference standards were intraoperative ultrasound and histology. Results: The per-patient accuracy of CT was 72.8 versus 78.4{\%} for unenhanced MRI (p=0.071) and 82.4{\%} for MnDPDP-enhanced MRI (p=0.005). MnDPDP-enhanced MRI appeared to be more accurate than unenhanced MRI but this was not significant (p=0.059). The sensitivity of CT was 48.4{\%} versus 58.1{\%} for unenhanced MRI (p=0.083) and 66.1{\%} for MnDPDP-enhanced MRI (p=0.004). The difference in specificity between procedures was not significant. The per-lesion sensitivity was 71.7, 74.9 and 82.7{\%} for CT, unenhanced MRI, and MnDPDP-enhanced MRI, respectively; the positive predictive value of the procedures was respectively 84.0, 96.0 and 95.8{\%}. MnDPDP-enhanced MRI provided a high level diagnostic confidence in 92.5{\%} of the cases versus 82.5{\%} for both unenhanced MRI and CT. The kappa value for inter-observer variability was >0.75 for all procedures. Conclusions: The diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity of MnD PDP-enhanced MRI is significantly higher than single section spiral CT in the detection of colorectal cancer liver metastases; no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy was observed between unenhanced MRI and MnDPDP-enhanced MRI.",
author = "Daniele Regge and D. Campanella and Anselmetti, {G. C.} and S. Cirillo and Gallo, {T. M.} and A. Muratore and L. Capussotti and G. Galatola and I. Floriani and M. Aglietta",
year = "2006",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1016/j.crad.2005.12.010",
language = "English",
volume = "61",
pages = "338--347",
journal = "Clinical Radiology",
issn = "0009-9260",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Diagnostic accuracy of portal-phase CT and MRI with mangafodipir trisodium in detecting liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma

AU - Regge, Daniele

AU - Campanella, D.

AU - Anselmetti, G. C.

AU - Cirillo, S.

AU - Gallo, T. M.

AU - Muratore, A.

AU - Capussotti, L.

AU - Galatola, G.

AU - Floriani, I.

AU - Aglietta, M.

PY - 2006/4

Y1 - 2006/4

N2 - Aim: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of single section spiral computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with tissue-specific contrast agent mangafodipir trisodium (MnDPDP) in the detection of colorectal liver metastases. Material and Methods: One hundred and twenty-five consecutive patients undergoing surgery for primary and/or metastatic disease were evaluated using CT (5 mm collimation and reconstruction interval, pitch 2), two-dimensional fast spoiled gradient echo (2D FSPGR) T1 and single shot fast-spin echo (SSFSE) T2 weighted breath-hold MRI sequences, performed before and after intravenous administration of MnDPDP. The reference standards were intraoperative ultrasound and histology. Results: The per-patient accuracy of CT was 72.8 versus 78.4% for unenhanced MRI (p=0.071) and 82.4% for MnDPDP-enhanced MRI (p=0.005). MnDPDP-enhanced MRI appeared to be more accurate than unenhanced MRI but this was not significant (p=0.059). The sensitivity of CT was 48.4% versus 58.1% for unenhanced MRI (p=0.083) and 66.1% for MnDPDP-enhanced MRI (p=0.004). The difference in specificity between procedures was not significant. The per-lesion sensitivity was 71.7, 74.9 and 82.7% for CT, unenhanced MRI, and MnDPDP-enhanced MRI, respectively; the positive predictive value of the procedures was respectively 84.0, 96.0 and 95.8%. MnDPDP-enhanced MRI provided a high level diagnostic confidence in 92.5% of the cases versus 82.5% for both unenhanced MRI and CT. The kappa value for inter-observer variability was >0.75 for all procedures. Conclusions: The diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity of MnD PDP-enhanced MRI is significantly higher than single section spiral CT in the detection of colorectal cancer liver metastases; no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy was observed between unenhanced MRI and MnDPDP-enhanced MRI.

AB - Aim: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of single section spiral computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with tissue-specific contrast agent mangafodipir trisodium (MnDPDP) in the detection of colorectal liver metastases. Material and Methods: One hundred and twenty-five consecutive patients undergoing surgery for primary and/or metastatic disease were evaluated using CT (5 mm collimation and reconstruction interval, pitch 2), two-dimensional fast spoiled gradient echo (2D FSPGR) T1 and single shot fast-spin echo (SSFSE) T2 weighted breath-hold MRI sequences, performed before and after intravenous administration of MnDPDP. The reference standards were intraoperative ultrasound and histology. Results: The per-patient accuracy of CT was 72.8 versus 78.4% for unenhanced MRI (p=0.071) and 82.4% for MnDPDP-enhanced MRI (p=0.005). MnDPDP-enhanced MRI appeared to be more accurate than unenhanced MRI but this was not significant (p=0.059). The sensitivity of CT was 48.4% versus 58.1% for unenhanced MRI (p=0.083) and 66.1% for MnDPDP-enhanced MRI (p=0.004). The difference in specificity between procedures was not significant. The per-lesion sensitivity was 71.7, 74.9 and 82.7% for CT, unenhanced MRI, and MnDPDP-enhanced MRI, respectively; the positive predictive value of the procedures was respectively 84.0, 96.0 and 95.8%. MnDPDP-enhanced MRI provided a high level diagnostic confidence in 92.5% of the cases versus 82.5% for both unenhanced MRI and CT. The kappa value for inter-observer variability was >0.75 for all procedures. Conclusions: The diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity of MnD PDP-enhanced MRI is significantly higher than single section spiral CT in the detection of colorectal cancer liver metastases; no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy was observed between unenhanced MRI and MnDPDP-enhanced MRI.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33644958747&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33644958747&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.crad.2005.12.010

DO - 10.1016/j.crad.2005.12.010

M3 - Article

C2 - 16546464

AN - SCOPUS:33644958747

VL - 61

SP - 338

EP - 347

JO - Clinical Radiology

JF - Clinical Radiology

SN - 0009-9260

IS - 4

ER -