Comparison of Contrast Agents in Liver Magnetic Resonance (MR) for the Detection of Hepatic Metastases

Evaluation of Liver Magnetic Resonance (MR) With an Abbreviated Gadobenate Dimeglumine Hepatobiliary Phase Protocol in Comparison to Liver MR With Gadoxetate Disodium for the Detection of Hepatic Metastases

If an abbreviated hepatobiliary phase (HBP) protocol liver MR with gadobenate dimeglumine is shown clinically comparable to standard of care liver MR with gadoxetate disodium for detecting hepatic metastasis from colorectal cancer, its use will save time, cost, and patients' effort.

The goal is to:

• Estimate and compare the diagnostic performance, including sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive value, and area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROC), of abbreviated protocol liver magnetic resonance (MR) with hepatobiliary phase (HBP) using gadobenate dimeglumine for detecting liver metastases, with 1) abbreviated protocol liver MR with HBP using gadoxetate disodium, 2) standard of care complete protocol liver MR using gadoxetate disodium, and 3) complete protocol liver MR using gadobenate dimeglumine.
• Estimate and compare quantitative measures of HBP images (liver enhancement ratio, lesion contrast to noise and signal to noise ratios [CNR and SNR]) for both gadobenate dimeglumine and gadoxetate disodium.
• Qualitatively assess the preference, or lack thereof, of radiologists regarding the images generated by abbreviated protocol liver MR with HBP using gadobenate dimeglumine versus abbreviated protocol liver MR with HBP using gadoxetate disodium.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Colorectal cancer patients
• Age 18-80 years
• No prior treatment including surgery
• Prior imaging with suspected liver metastasis

Exclusion Criteria:

• Age < 18 years or > 80 years
• eGFR < 30 ml/min/1.73 m2
• Previous reaction to gadolinium contrast agents
• History of claustrophobia or movement disorders likely to impact image quality
• Non-MR safe implants or metallic foreign bodies