Hepatic metastases: diffusion-weighted sensitivity-encoding versus SPIO-enhanced MR imaging
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 11, 2026
Registered Bioimaging of Nanomaterials for Diagnostic and Therapeutic Monitoring
Published on: December 9, 2010
Katsuhiro Nasu1, Yoshihumi Kuroki, Shigeru Nawano
1Department of Diagnostic Radiology, National Cancer Center Hospital East, 6-5-1 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba 277-8577, Japan. kanasu@east.ncc.go.jp
Purpose:
To retrospectively compare accuracy of diffusion-weighted (DW) single-shot echo-planar imaging with sensitivity encoding (SENSE) with that of superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO)-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the evaluation of hepatic metastases due to extrahepatic malignancies.
Materials And Methods:
Patients provided informed consent; ethics committee approval was not required. The data of 24 patients (16 men, eight women; age range, 41-68 years; mean age, 61.9 years) with 40 resected hepatic metastases were retrospectively reviewed. Before SPIO administration, DW SENSE imaging and T2-weighted fast spin-echo (SE) and T1-weighted dual-echo fast field-echo (FFE) MR imaging were performed. After SPIO administration, T2-weighted fast SE, T1-weighted dual-echo, and T2*-weighted FFE MR examinations were performed. Images were divided into two sets: The SPIO-enhanced MR image set consisted of pre- and postcontrast T2-weighted fast SE and dual-echo T1-weighted FFE images and postcontrast T2*-weighted FFE images. The DW SENSE image set included DW SENSE images and precontrast T2-weighted fast SE and dual-echo T1-weighted FFE images. Three radiologists individually interpreted these images and sorted the confidence levels for presence of hepatic metastasis in each section into five grades. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (A(z)) was calculated for each image set.
Results:
Hepatic metastases showed higher signal intensity on DW SENSE images than on T2-weighted fast SE images. Conversely, signals from vessels and cysts were suppressed with DW SENSE imaging. ROC analysis showed higher A(z) values when the DW SENSE image set was interpreted (0.90) than when the SPIO-enhanced MR image set was interpreted (0.81). The sensitivity and specificity, respectively, of total cases were 0.66 and 0.90, for the SPIO-enhanced MR image set and 0.82 and 0.94 for the DW SENSE image set. During SPIO-enhanced MR image interpretation, lesions 1 cm in diameter or smaller showed significantly lower sensitivity than lesions larger than 1 cm in diameter. During both interpretation sessions, left lobe lesions showed significantly lower sensitivity than right lobe lesions.
Conclusion:
Combined reading of DW SENSE images and T2-weighted fast SE and dual-echo T1-weighted FFE MR images showed higher accuracy in the detection of hepatic metastases than did reading of SPIO-enhanced MR images.
