MRI vs. CTscan for accessing condition of liver

Has anyone ever had an MRI to check out their liver?  I have had CT scans.  The newest ones are able to see cirrohsis as well as tumors.  What about MRIs, are they as accurate?  Pros, cons?  Thanks, Ocean

[Hepatitis Researcher]

MRIs gives about the same info than catscan. They are also better than US but more expensive. Lesions as small as 3mm can be seen. Hemangimas can be distinguished from early HCC better using MRI, since the blood in the hemangioma generates a better contrast than a tumor. Furthermore MRI has zero radiation exposure.

[Cindy10]

My husband was dx with cirrhosis from an ultrasound, the biopsy
showed stage 2. So you cant always count on the bx. Of course he had other things that helped with the dx, low platelets, enlarged spleen, endoscopy.

[NYgirl]

I've never heard of anyone having an MRI for their liver.  A catscan will see the organic problems like cancer / growths and cirrhosis perhapas and a biopsy will see the fibrosis/cirhhosis (can't spell).  I don't know why you'd need to get an MRI really.

The biopsy is the best way to see the level of liver damage you have. You can't really know without it (going by an ultrasound).

[somuchmore]

I began to get MRI every 6 months along with blood work shortly after my 2nd biopsy '03 which showed 2/3(fibrosis/inflammation). Before then my MRI test came once a year. First biopsy '98 was 0/1 (fibrosis/inflammation). The marked change (0/1--->>2/3) prompted the twice a year MRI. The MRI is looking for changes in size of liver, spleen, etc.. and any mass development.

Also, I had CT image with oral and intravenous contrast back in 2005. I understood this was being used in order to get view of portal venous, arterial. In other words to check out blood flow through my liver and other organs up to lower lungs.

[ZeroFrancis]

I was asking my consultant hepatologist recently about fibroscan  because biopsy is not a good option for me. She told me that fibroscan yields only very limited information about liver health but that there is a new technique which she hopes to be able to offer soon. This is called micro-bubble imaging. I don't think it's a new technique but it's application as a diagnostic aid in hepatology apparently is new. I believe it's a refinement of ultrasound technology which produces far better info than simple ultrasound. I believe they inject the patient with a fizzy contrast agent which enhances the ultrasound image as it passes through the liver. My doc sounded very positive about this. That's about all I know about it at the moment but I thought you guys might like to hear.

Check it out!

[cantlivenotknowing]

I have had ultrasound, CT Scan and an MRI. The reason I had an MRI after a CT scan is that an MRI is slightly more sensitive and in the case of a focal mass which may show up as it did in may case on my CT scan, my dr. proceeded with an MRI to get more detail on whether a 3 millimeter mass was hyperattenuative or hypoattenuative. My mass is hypo rather than hyper on MRI. A hypoattenuitive mass is more likely to be a cyst rather than cancer. That would be one of the primary reasons for doing both a CT and an MRI. I don't think that CT or MRI is sensitive enough for identifying mild fibrosis, but an MRI can differentiate a mass if one is identified better than a CT scan can.

[Tallahassee]

I have almost yearly MRIs and bi-annually (or so) CT scans.  In my case, a Dr monitor my

[beaz10]

Hi i am out of my mind with worry my dad went to docs a weeks ago as face turned yellow and also eyes, he has lost a tiny bit of weight not alot but that is cus had diarrhea for couple of weeks, his urine is slightly darker and going alot more than usual, doc checked him out and said she thought could feel somethin on right side didnt no what it was but could be gallstones, had blood tests and have came back slightly abnormal so are sending him for ultra sound this wednesday i am so worried he is only 56 and dont no what to do with my self, is there a chance it could be anything other than cancer he is also having bit of nausea, no vomiting and has itchy hands and feet.

[Chuck2892]

I have had Ultra Sound, Blood tests, CT cans which have all shown scarring and small masses but no indication they are cancerous. My blood test keep coming back as improved and almost normal again, the ultra Sound showed scarring which was old and we knew about, the CT showed scarring but no indication of cancer, and now they want to do a MRI. I am beginning th feel like a ATM machine, they keep running unneeded test, all come back negative, what are they looking for? I am wondering if I should subject myself to an MRI.

[willbb]

You have tagged on to a very old thread
.In the future it would be better to start your own thread by going to the  orange"post a question " area at the top to do this.

This forum pertains to HCV and the treatment paradigms of such..Do you have HCV?

Best...

Will