HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 2333031977v1 233/3/659    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lee, V. S. Articles by Teperman, L. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lee, V. S. Articles by Teperman, L. W.

Defining Intrahepatic Biliary Anatomy in Living Liver Transplant Donor Candidates at Mangafodipir Trisodium–enhanced MR Cholangiography versus Conventional T2-weighted MR Cholangiography¹

¹ From the Departments of Radiology (V.S.L., G.A.K., C.A.N., J.S.C., J.S.B., J.C.L.) and Transplant Surgery (G.R.M., L.W.T.), New York University Medical Center, 530 First Ave, New York, NY 10016. Received December 6, 2003; revision requested February 6, 2004; revision received February 26; accepted March 29. Supported by Amersham Health, Princeton, NJ. Address correspondence to V.S.L. (e-mail: vivian.lee@med.nyu.edu).

PURPOSE: To compare three-dimensional (3D) mangafodipir trisodium–enhanced T1-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) cholangiography with conventional T2-weighted MR cholangiography for depiction and definition of intrahepatic biliary anatomy in liver transplant donor candidates.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred eight healthy liver transplant donor candidates were examined with two MR cholangiographic methods. All candidates gave written informed consent, and the study was approved by the institutional review board. First, breath-hold transverse and coronal half-Fourier single-shot turbo spin-echo and breath-hold oblique coronal heavily T2-weighted turbo spin-echo sequences were performed. Second, mangafodipir trisodium–enhanced breath-hold fat-suppressed 3D gradient-echo sequences were performed through the ducts (oblique coronal plane) and through the entire liver (transverse plane). Interpretation of biliary anatomy findings, particularly variants affecting right liver lobe biliary drainage, and degree of interpretation confidence at both 3D mangafodipir trisodium–enhanced MR cholangiography and T2-weighted MR cholangiography were recorded and compared by using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Then, consensus interpretations of both MR image sets together were performed. Intraoperative cholangiography was the reference-standard examination for 51 subjects who underwent right lobe hepatectomy. The McNemar test was used to compare the accuracies of the individual MR techniques with that of the consensus interpretation of both image sets together and to compare each technique with intraoperative cholangiography.

RESULTS: Biliary anatomy was visualized with mangafodipir trisodium enhancement in all patients. Mangafodipir trisodium–enhanced image findings agreed with findings seen at combined interpretations significantly more often than did T2-weighted image findings (in 107 [99%] vs 88 [82%] of 108 donor candidates, P < .001). Confidence was significantly higher with the mangafodipir trisodium–enhanced images than with the T2-weighted images (mean confidence score, 4.5 vs 3.4; P < .001). In the 51 candidates who underwent intraoperative cholangiography, mangafodipir trisodium–enhanced imaging correctly depicted the biliary anatomy more often than did T2-weighted imaging (in 47 [92%] vs 43 [84%] donor candidates, P = .14), whereas the two MR imaging techniques combined correctly depicted the anatomy in 48 (94%) candidates.

CONCLUSION: Mangafodipir trisodium–enhanced 3D MR cholangiography depicts intrahepatic biliary anatomy, especially right duct variants, more accurately than does conventional T2-weighted MR cholangiography.

© RSNA, 2004

Index terms: Bile ducts, anatomy • Bile ducts, MR, 768.121411, 768.121412, 768.121416, 768.12142, 768.12143 • Liver, MR, 768.121411, 768.121412, 768.121416, 768.12142, 768.12143 • Liver, transplantation

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. S. Lim, M.-J. Kim, S. Myoung, M.-S. Park, J.-Y. Choi, J.-S. Choi, and S. I. Kim MR Cholangiography for Evaluation of Hilar Branching Anatomy in Transplantation of the Right Hepatic Lobe from a Living Donor Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2008; 191(2): 537 - 545. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Zhang, G. M. Israel, E. M. Hecht, G. A. Krinsky, J. S. Babb, and V. S. Lee Isotropic 3D T2-Weighted MR Cholangiopancreatography with Parallel Imaging: Feasibility Study. Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2006; 187(6): 1564 - 1570. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Schroeder, A. Radtke, H. Kuehl, J. F. Debatin, M. Malago, and S. G. Ruehm Evaluation of Living Liver Donors with an All-inclusive 3D Multi-Detector Row CT Protocol Radiology, March 1, 2006; 238(3): 900 - 910. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]