AJR F and L Medical Products: Radiation Protection & More
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ba-Ssalamah, A.
Right arrow Articles by Mann, F. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ba-Ssalamah, A.
Right arrow Articles by Mann, F. A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?
AJR 2002; 179:1447-1456
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Atypical Focal Nodular Hyperplasia of the Liver: Imaging Features of Nonspecific and Liver-Specific MR Contrast Agents

Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah1, Wolfgang Schima1, Maria T. Schmook1, Ken F. Linnau2, Nadja Schibany1, Thomas Helbich1, Peter Reimer3, Friedrich Laengle4, Friedrich Wrba5, Amir Kurtaran6, Mark Ryan7 and Frederick A. Mann2

1 Department of Radiology, University of Vienna, Waehringer Gürtel 18-20, A-1090 Vienna, Austria.
2 Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Harborview Medical Center, Box 359728, Seattle, WA 98104-2499.
3 Department of Radiology, Klinikum Karlsruhe, Moltkestr. 90, D-76133 Karlsruhe, Germany.
4 Department of Surgery, University of Vienna, A-1090 Vienna, Austria.
5 Department of Pathology, University of Vienna, A-1090 Vienna, Austria.
6 Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Vienna, A-1090 Vienna, Austria.
7 Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710.

OBJECTIVE. The objective of our study was to describe the functional and differential uptake features of atypical focal nodular hyperplasia using different MR contrast agents and to evaluate their potential role in the diagnosis and characterization of focal nodular hyperplasia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Contrast-enhanced MR images of 45 patients with 85 focal nodular hyperplasia lesions were retrospectively reviewed. In these patients, sonographic findings were nonspecific (n = 37), or CT features were inconclusive (n = 8). Non—liver specific gadolinium chelates were used in 18 patients (48 lesions) suspected of having either focal nodular hyperplasia or hemangioma. The following liver-specific agents were used in patients with suspected focal nodular hyperplasia or metastases: mangafodipir trisodium, 30 patients (55 lesions); ferumoxides, six patients (16 lesions); and SHU 555 A, six patients (six lesions). Individual lesions were quantified by signal intensity and assessed qualitatively by homogeneity, contrast enhancement, and presence of a central scar.

RESULTS. At unenhanced MR imaging, the triad of homogeneity, isointensity, and central scar was found in 22% of the focal nodular hyperplasia lesions. On mangafodipir trisodium—enhanced T1-weighted images, all focal nodular hyperplasia lesions showed contrast uptake: in 64% of the lesions, uptake was equal to parenchyma; 25%, greater than the parenchyma; and 11%, less than the parenchyma. On iron oxide—enhanced T2-weighted images, all focal nodular hyperplasia lesions showed uptake of the contrast agent, but contrast uptake in the lesions was less than in the surrounding parenchyma. Dynamic gadolinium chelate—enhanced MR imaging showed early and vigorous enhancement of focal nodular hyperplasia lesions with rapid washout in 88%. Atypical imaging features of the lesions included hyperintensity on T1-weighted images, necrosis and hemorrhage, and inhomogeneous or only minimal contrast uptake.

CONCLUSION. For patients in whom the diagnosis of focal nodular hyperplasia cannot be established on unenhanced or gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging, homogeneous uptake of liver-specific contrast agent with better delineation of central scar may help to make a confident diagnosis of focal nodular hyperplasia.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. Ferlicot, H. Kobeiter, J. T. Van Nhieu, D. Cherqui, D. Dhumeaux, D. Mathieu, and E. S. Zafrani
MRI of Atypical Focal Nodular Hyperplasia of the Liver: Radiology-Pathology Correlation
Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2004; 182(5): 1227 - 1231.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
A. D. Levy
Invited Commentary
RadioGraphics, January 1, 2004; 24(1): 18 - 19.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2002 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.