4.7 Article

Usefulness of Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging in the evaluation of simple steatosis and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis

期刊

JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
卷 37, 期 5, 页码 1137-1143

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.23921

关键词

magnetic resonance imaging; contrast media; fatty liver

资金

  1. Japan China Sasakawa Medical Fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To evaluate the usefulness of gadolinium ethoxybenzyl diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced MR imaging (EOB-MRI) in differentiating between simple steatosis and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), as compared with MR in-phase/out-of-phase imaging. The correlations between the MR features and histological characteristics were preliminarily investigated. Materials and Methods: From April 2008 to October 2011, 25 patients (13 simple steatosis and 12 NASH) who underwent both EOB-MRI and in-phase/out-of-phase imaging were analyzed. The hepatobiliary-phase enhancement ratio and signal intensity loss on opposed-phase T1-weighted images (fat fraction) were compared between the simple steatosis and NASH groups. In the simple steatosis and NASH groups, the correlations between enhancement ratio and histological grade/stage were explored. In the NASH group, fat fraction was correlated with the steatosis score. Results: The enhancement ratio in NASH was significantly lower than that in simple steatosis (P = 0.03). In the simple steatosis and NASH groups, the enhancement ratio was significantly correlated with the fibrosis stage (r = 0.469, P = 0.018). Fat fraction in NASH was strongly correlated with the steatosis score (r = 0.728, P = 0.007). Conclusion: In simple steatosis and NASH, the hepatobiliary-phase enhancement ratio of EOB-MRI showed significant association with fibrosis stage, and may be a useful discriminating parameter compared with the fat fraction measured by in-phase/out-of-phase imaging. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2012;37:11371143. (c) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据