Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 10/2012

01-10-2012 | Hepatobiliary-Pancreas

MR elastography of liver tumours: value of viscoelastic properties for tumour characterisation

Authors: Philippe Garteiser, Sabrina Doblas, Jean-Luc Daire, Mathilde Wagner, Helena Leitao, Valérie Vilgrain, Ralph Sinkus, Bernard E. Van Beers

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 10/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

To assess the value of the viscoelastic parameters in the characterisation of liver tumours at MR elastography.

Patients and methods

Ninety-four patients with liver tumours >1 cm prospectively underwent MR elastography using 50-Hz mechanical waves and a full three-directional motion-sensitive sequence. The model-free viscoelastic parameters (the complex shear modulus and its real and imaginary parts, i.e. the storage and loss moduli) were calculated in 72 lesions after exclusion of cystic, treated or histopathologically undetermined tumours.

Results

We observed higher absolute shear modulus and loss modulus in malignant versus benign tumours (3.38 ± 0.26 versus 2.41 ± 0.15 kPa, P < 0.01 and 2.25 ± 0.26 versus 1.05 ± 0.13 kPa, P < 0.001, respectively). Moreover, the loss modulus of hepatocellular carcinomas was significantly higher than in benign hepatocellular tumours. The storage modulus did not differ significantly between malignant and benign tumours. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of loss modulus was significantly larger than that of the absolute shear modulus and storage modulus when comparing malignant and benign lesions.

Conclusions

The increased loss modulus is a better discriminator between benign and malignant tumours than the increased storage modulus or absolute value of the shear modulus.

Key Points

• Magnetic Resonance elastography is a new method of assessing the liver.
• Increased loss modulus is an indicator of malignancy in hepatic tumours.
• Loss modulus is a better discriminator than absolute shear modulus values.
• The viscoelastic properties of lesions offer promise for characterising liver tumours.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Taouli B, Losada M, Holland A, Krinsky G (2004) Magnetic resonance imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 127:S144–152PubMedCrossRef
2.
Bahirwani R, Reddy KR (2008) Review article: the evaluation of solitary liver masses. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 28:953–965PubMed
3.
Bruegel M, Holzapfel K, Gaa J et al (2008) Characterization of focal liver lesions by ADC measurements using a respiratory triggered diffusion-weighted single-shot echo-planar MR imaging technique. Eur Radiol 18:477–485PubMedCrossRef
4.
Silva AC, Evans JM, McCullough AE, Jatoi MA, Vargas HE, Hara AK (2009) MR imaging of hypervascular liver masses: a review of current techniques. Radiographics 29:385–402PubMedCrossRef
5.
Kudo M (2010) Will Gd-EOB-MRI change the diagnostic algorithm in hepatocellular carcinoma? Oncology 78:87–93PubMedCrossRef
6.
7.
Muthupillai R, Lomas DJ, Rossman PJ, Greenleaf JF, Manduca A, Ehman RL (1995) Magnetic resonance elastography by direct visualization of propagating acoustic strain waves. Science 269:1854–1857PubMedCrossRef
8.
Sinkus R, Tanter M, Xydeas T, Catheline S, Bercoff J, Fink M (2005) Viscoelastic shear properties of in vivo breast lesions measured by MR elastography. Magn Reson Imaging 23:159–165PubMedCrossRef
9.
Asbach P, Klatt D, Schlosser B et al (2010) Viscoelasticity-based staging of hepatic fibrosis with multifrequency MR elastography. Radiology 257:80–86PubMedCrossRef
10.
Sinkus R, Lorenzen J, Schrader D, Lorenzen M, Dargatz M, Holz D (2000) High-resolution tensor MR elastography for breast tumour detection. Phys Med Biol 45:1649–1664PubMedCrossRef
11.
Huwart L, Peeters F, Sinkus R et al (2006) Liver fibrosis: non-invasive assessment with MR elastography. NMR Biomed 19:173–179PubMedCrossRef
12.
Yin M, Talwalkar JA, Glaser KJ et al (2007) Assessment of hepatic fibrosis with magnetic resonance elastography. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 5:e1202CrossRef
13.
Huwart L, Sempoux C, Vicaut E et al (2008) Magnetic resonance elastography for the noninvasive staging of liver fibrosis. Gastroenterology 135:32–40PubMedCrossRef
14.
Venkatesh SK, Yin M, Glockner JF et al (2008) MR elastography of liver tumors: preliminary results. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:1534–1540PubMedCrossRef
15.
Manduca A, Oliphant TE, Dresner MA et al (2001) Magnetic resonance elastography: non-invasive mapping of tissue elasticity. Med Image Anal 5:237–254PubMedCrossRef
16.
Mariappan YK, Glaser KJ, Ehman RL (2010) Magnetic resonance elastography: a review. Clin Anat 23:497–511PubMedCrossRef
17.
Bavu E, Gennisson JL, Couade M et al (2011) Noninvasive in vivo liver fibrosis evaluation using supersonic shear imaging: a clinical study on 113 hepatitis C virus patients. Ultrasound Med Biol 37:1361–1373PubMedCrossRef
18.
Ronot M, Bahrami S, Calderaro J et al (2011) Hepatocellular adenomas: accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and liver biopsy in subtype classification. Hepatology 53:1182–1191PubMedCrossRef
19.
Bruix J, Sherman M, Llovet JM et al (2001) Clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Conclusions of the Barcelona-2000 EASL conference. J Hepatol 35:421–430PubMedCrossRef
20.
Bruix J, Sherman M (2011) Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology 53:1020–1022PubMedCrossRef
21.
Sinkus R, Tanter M, Catheline S et al (2005) Imaging anisotropic and viscous properties of breast tissue by magnetic resonance-elastography. Magn Reson Med 53:372–387PubMedCrossRef
22.
Padhani AR, Liu G, Koh DM et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: consensus and recommendations. Neoplasia 11:102–125PubMed
23.
Zweig MH, Campbell G (1993) Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. Clin Chem 39:561–577PubMed
24.
DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL (1988) Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44:837–845PubMedCrossRef
25.
International Working Party (1995) Terminology of nodular hepatocellular lesions. Hepatology 22:983–993
26.
Fahey BJ, Nelson RC, Bradway DP, Hsu SJ, Dumont DM, Trahey GE (2008) In vivo visualization of abdominal malignancies with acoustic radiation force elastography. Phys Med Biol 53:279–293PubMedCrossRef
27.
Cho SH, Lee JY, Han JK, Choi BI (2010) Acoustic radiation force impulse elastography for the evaluation of focal solid hepatic lesions: preliminary findings. Ultrasound Med Biol 36:202–208PubMedCrossRef
28.
Tseng Y, Fedorov E, McCaffery JM, Almo SC, Wirtz D (2001) Micromechanics and ultrastructure of actin filament networks crosslinked by human fascin: a comparison with alpha-actinin. J Mol Biol 310:351–366PubMedCrossRef
29.
30.
Weaver VM, Roskelley CD (1997) Extracellular matrix: the central regulator of cell and tissue homeostasis. Trends Cell Biol 7:40–42PubMedCrossRef
31.
Bilston LE (2002) The effect of perfusion on soft tissue mechanical properties: a computational model. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 5:283–290PubMedCrossRef
32.
Fukumura D, Jain RK (2007) Tumor microvasculature and microenvironment: targets for anti-angiogenesis and normalization. Microvasc Res 74:72–84PubMedCrossRef
33.
Gialeli C, Theocharis AD, Karamanos NK (2011) Roles of matrix metalloproteinases in cancer progression and their pharmacological targeting. FEBS J 278:16–27PubMedCrossRef
34.
Siegmann KC, Xydeas T, Sinkus R, Kraemer B, Vogel U, Claussen CD (2010) Diagnostic value of MR elastography in addition to contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast-initial clinical results. Eur Radiol 20:318–325PubMedCrossRef
35.
Garteiser P, Doblas S, Daire J-L, et al (2011) Combining biomechanical and diffusion data into a composite biomarker for the determination of hepatic tumor malignancy. Proceedings of the 2011 conference of the European Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine and Biology 28
36.
Mariappan YK, Rossman PJ, Glaser KJ, Manduca A, Ehman RL (2009) Magnetic resonance elastography with a phased-array acoustic driver system. Magn Reson Med 61:678–685PubMedCrossRef
37.
Asbach P, Klatt D, Hamhaber U et al (2008) Assessment of liver viscoelasticity using multifrequency MR elastography. Magn Reson Med 60:373–379PubMedCrossRef
38.
Berry GP, Bamber JC, Armstrong CG, Miller NR, Barbone PE (2006) Towards an acoustic model-based poroelastic imaging method: I. Theoretical foundation. Ultrasound Med Biol 32:547–567PubMedCrossRef
39.
Berry GP, Bamber JC, Miller NR, Barbone PE, Bush NL, Armstrong CG (2006) Towards an acoustic model-based poroelastic imaging method: II. experimental investigation. Ultrasound Med Biol 32:1869–1885PubMedCrossRef
40.
Klatt D, Hamhaber U, Asbach P, Braun J, Sack I (2007) Noninvasive assessment of the rheological behavior of human organs using multifrequency MR elastography: a study of brain and liver viscoelasticity. Phys Med Biol 52:7281–7294PubMedCrossRef
41.
Konofagou EE, Harrigan TP, Ophir J, Krouskop TA (2001) Poroelastography: imaging the poroelastic properties of tissues. Ultrasound Med Biol 27:1387–1397PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
MR elastography of liver tumours: value of viscoelastic properties for tumour characterisation
Authors
Philippe Garteiser
Sabrina Doblas
Jean-Luc Daire
Mathilde Wagner
Helena Leitao
Valérie Vilgrain
Ralph Sinkus
Bernard E. Van Beers
Publication date
01-10-2012
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 10/2012
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2474-6

Other articles of this Issue 10/2012

European Radiology 10/2012 Go to the issue

Urogenital

Quantitative elastography of renal transplants using supersonic shear imaging: a pilot study

Contrast Media

Contrast-induced nephropathy in patients with renal insufficiency undergoing contrast-enhanced MDCT

Neuro

Brain imaging findings in symptomatic patients after allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: correlation with clinical outcome

Contrast Media

MR liver imaging with Gd-EOB-DTPA: a delay time of 10 minutes is sufficient for lesion characterisation

Pediatric

Accuracy, image quality and radiation dose comparison of high-pitch spiral and sequential acquisition on 128-slice dual-source CT angiography in children with congenital heart disease

Interventional

Nitroglycerine use in transcatheter arterial (chemo)embolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and dual-energy CT assessment of Lipiodol retention