User Ratings

Your rating: None (1 vote)
Your rating: None
Your rating: None
Add your comments

Hepatic MRI for GE Scanners

Donald G. Mitchell1,  Pater Natale1,  George Holland1

1Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Unit Number: 
Unit A15.2
DOI: 
10.1002/0471142719.mia1502s04
Online Posting Date: 
May, 2002
GO TO THE FULL TEXT:
PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library
Are you the author of this protocol? Login or register and return to this page.

Abstract

MRI techniques continue to evolve rapidly, but the basic components of a liver examination, and the clinical role of each component, have changed little. The three most important considerations for choosing techniques for imaging the liver continue to be contrast, motion artifact, and coverage. This unit presents a Basic Protocol for liver imaging for General Electric (GE) scanners. However, these basic approaches to hepatic MR imaging are quite similar, with most details relating to minor vendor-specific differences.

     
 
GO TO THE FULL PROTOCOL:
PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library

Table of Contents

  • Unit Introduction
  • Basic Protocol: Liver Imaging
  • Commentary
  • Bibliography
  • Figures
  • Tables
     
 
GO TO THE FULL PROTOCOL:
PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library

Materials

Basic Protocol: Liver Imaging

 Materials
  • Normal saline (0.9% NaCl), sterile, 100 ml minimum
  • Extravascular contrast agent (e.g., Magnevist, Omniscan, or Prohance), 20 ml for most patients
  • 22-G angiocatheter
  • 110-in. extension tubing
     
 
GO TO THE FULL PROTOCOL:
PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library

Figures

  • Figure A15.2.1
    T2-weighted coronal single shot FSE sequence used as a localizer, with an effective TE of 100 msec. Arrow indicates a small cavernous hemangioma.

  • Figure A15.2.2
    Heavily T2-weighted transverse single shot FSE image, with effective TE = 180 msec. Arrow indicates the small cavernous hemangioma, with signal intensity intermediate between that of spleen and cerebrospinal fluid.

  • Figure A15.2.3
    Spoiled gradient echo images: out-of-phase, with TE = 2.3 msec (A) and in-phase, with TE = 4.6 msec (B).

  • Figure A15.2.4
    Selected images from sagittal timing bolus sequence, without (A) and during (B) aortic enhancement (arrows) from the 2-ml bolus of gadolinium chelate.

  • Figure A15.2.5
    3-D fat-suppressed short TR gradient echo images with TR/TE = 4 msec/1.3 msec, and flip angle = 12°, before (A), immediately after (B), and 45 sec after (C) gadolinium chelate injection. Through Fourier interpolation, images are reconstructed every 2.5 mm. Arrows indicate the cavernous hemangioma, which does not show enhancement in A.

  • Figure A15.2.6
    Moderately T2-weighted FSE breath-hold image, with TR = 2850 msec, effective TE = 82 msec. Arrow indicates hemangioma.

  • Figure A15.2.7
    Two-min post-gadolinium fat-suppressed short TR gradient echo transverse image (extracellular-phase) demonstrates delayed contrast enhancement, including the cavernous hemangioma (arrow).

Literature Cited

 Literature Cited
    Earls, J.P., Rofsky, N.M., Lee, V.S., DeCorato, D.R., Krinsky, G.A., and Weinreb, J.C. 1997. Hepatic arterial-phase dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging: Optimization with a test examination and a power injector. Radiology 202:268-273.
    Ito, K., Mitchell, D.G., Outwater, E.K., Szklaruk, J., and Sadek, A.G. 1997. Hepatic lesions: Discrimination of nonsolid, benign lesions from solid, malignant lesions with heavily T2-weighted fast spin-echo MR imaging. Radiology 204:729-737.
    Jeong, Y.Y., Mitchell, D.G., and Holland, G. 2001. Liver lesion conspicuity on T2-weighted breath-hold fast spin-echo MR imaging before and after gadolinium administration: Initial experience. Radiology 221:117-121.
    Marks, B., Mitchell, D.G., and Simelaro, J.P. 1997. Breath-holding in healthy and pulmonary-compromised populations: Effects of hyperventilation and oxygen inspiration. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 7:595-597.
    Shellock, F.G. and Kanal, E. 1996. Magnetic Resonance Bioeffects, Safety, and Patient Management. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia.
 Key References
    Shellock and Kanal, 1996. See above.

Covers a number of important patient management issues related to MR imaging, including recommended safety procedures, a list of metallic implants that have been tested for MR compatibility, and a list of other sources on MR safety.

 Internet Resources
    http://www.mri.tju.edu

A noncommercial site that lists all body MRI protocols, continually updated, updated GE Signa scanners by the Thomas Jefferson University Department of Radiology. Additionally, there are descriptions and explanations of the various pulse sequences, tips for problems solving, and examples of clinical applications.

    http://www.mrisafety.com

Managed by Frank Shellock, contains updated items regarding MRI safety and compatibility.

     
 
GO TO THE FULL PROTOCOL:
PDF or HTML at Wiley Online Library
Looking for Answers?
Do you have tips, tricks, or improvements to share?

Join the Conversation

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.