Clinical usefulness of multiple arterial-phase images in gadoxetate disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Objectives: The multiple arterial-phase (AP) technique was introduced for liver MRI, but it is not really known if multiple AP MRI (MA-MRI) improves image quality and lesion detection rate on gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI in comparison with single AP MRI (SA-MRI). We aimed to determine the clinical usefulness of MA-MRI in comparison with SA-MRI.

Methods: Original articles reporting the percentage of adequate AP imaging and the lesion detection rate on gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MA-MRI were identified in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. The pooled percentage of adequate AP imaging and lesion detection rate were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis of single proportions. Subgroup analysis was performed to explain causes of study heterogeneity, and publication bias was evaluated using Egger's test.

Results: Of 772 articles screened, 22 studies in 12 articles were included: 18 studies (ten MA-MRI and eight SA-MRI) suitably defined the percentage of adequate AP imaging and four (three MA-MRI and one SA-MRI) defined the lesion detection rate. MA-MRI had 16.1% higher pooled percentage of adequate AP imaging than SA-MRI (94.8% vs. 78.7%, p < 0.01). MA-MRI additionally detected 33.2% of lesions than SA-MRI (83.2% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.06). Substantial study heterogeneity was found in MA-MRI, and the definition of adequate AP imaging, lesion characteristics, and reference standards were significant factors affecting study heterogeneity (p ≤ 0.02). Significant publication bias was found in MA-MRI (p < 0.01) but not in SA-MRI studies (p = 0.87).

Conclusions: Gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MA-MRI may be more clinically useful than SA-MRI, but further study is necessary to validate this finding because of study heterogeneity and publication bias.

Key points: • Multiple arterial-phase MRI (MA-MRI) had a 16.1% higher pooled percentage of adequate AP imaging than single arterial-phase MRI (SA-MRI) (94.8% vs. 78.7%, p < 0.01). • MA-MRI additionally detected an extra 33.2% of lesions compared with SA-MRI (83.2% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.06). • Substantial study heterogeneity and significant publication bias were found across MA-MRI studies.

Keywords: Detection; Liver; Magnetic resonance imaging; Meta-analysis.