Diagnostic performance of MRI for residual or recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after locoregional treatment according to contrast agent type: a systematic review and meta­analysis.

PURPOSE: The ideal contrast agent for imaging patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following locoregional therapies (LRT) remains uncertain. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging with extracellular contrast agent (ECA-MRI) and hepatobiliary agent (EOB-MRI) in detecting residual or recurrence HCC following LRT. METHODS: Original studies comparing the diagnostic performance of ECA-MRI and EOB-MRI were systematically identified through comprehensive searches in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of ECA-MRI and EOB-MRI were calculated using a bivariate-random-effects model. Subgroup-analyses were conducted to compare the diagnostic performance of ECA-MRI and EOB-MRI according to different variables. Meta-regression analysis was employed to explore potential sources of study heterogeneity. RESULTS: A total of 15 eligible studies encompassing 803 patients and 1018 lesions were included. Comparative analysis revealed no significant difference between ECA-MRI and EOB-MRI in the overall pooled sensitivity (87% vs. 79%) and specificity (92% vs. 96%) for the detection of residual or recurrent HCC after LRT (P = 0.41), with comparable areas under the HSROC of 0.95 and 0.92. Subgroup analyses indicated no significant diagnostic performance differences between ECA-MRI and EOB-MRI according to study design, type of LRT, most common etiology of liver disease, baseline lesion size, time of post-treated examination and MRI field strength (All P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: ECA-MRI exhibited overall comparable diagnostic performance to EOB-MRI in assessing residual or recurrent HCC after LRT.

Effects of Low-Osmolar Contrast Media on Long-Term Renal Impairment After Coronary Angiography: Iohexol Versus Iopromide.

To investigate the long-term effects of 2 commonly used low-osmolar contrast media, iohexol and iopromide, on renal function and survival in patients who underwent coronary angiography. A total of 14,141 cardiology patients from 2006 to 2013 were recruited, of whom 1,793 patients (679 patients on iohexol and 1,114 on iopromide) were evaluated for long-term renal impairment and 5,410 patients (1,679 patients on iohexol and 3,731 on iopromide) were admitted for survival analyses spanning as long as 15 years. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to explore the risk factors for long-term renal impairment. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to investigate the risk factors affecting survival. Propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting were applied to balance the baseline clinical characteristics. Patients receiving iohexol demonstrated a greater occurrence of renal impairment compared with those who received iopromide. Such difference remained consistent both before and after propensity score matching or inverse probability of treatment weighting, with a statistical significance of p <0.05. Among clinical variables, receiving contrast-enhanced contrast tomography/magnetic resonance imaging during follow-up, antihypertensive medication usage, presence of proteinuria, and anemia were identified as risk factors for long-term renal impairment (p = 0.041, 0.049, 0.006, and 0.029, respectively). During survival analyses, the difference was insignificant after propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting. In conclusion, administration of iohexol was more likely to induce long-term renal impairment than iopromide, particularly among patients diagnosed with anemia and proteinuria and those taking antihypertensive medication and with additional contrast exposure. The all-cause mortality, however, showed no significant difference between iohexol and iopromide administration.