Literature DB >> 19541441

The importance of AIF ROI selection in DCE-MRI renography: reproducibility and variability of renal perfusion and filtration.

M Cutajar1, I A Mendichovszky, P S Tofts, I Gordon.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate (a) the effect the choice of the region of interest (ROI) defining the aortic input function (AIF) has on the estimation of renal perfusion and filtration in dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) renography, and (b) the reproducibility of these parameters. Using renal DCE-MRI and a three-compartment model analysis, this work evaluated the effect two different AIFs, derived from variable sized ROIs in the aorta, has on calculating DCE-MRI renal perfusion and filtration values in a group of healthy adult volunteers who underwent two consecutive renal DCE-MRI studies.
METHODS: Fifteen healthy volunteers underwent two DCE-MRI studies under similar physiological conditions. Oblique-coronal DCE-MRI data volumes were acquired on a 1.5 T Siemens Avanto scanner with a 3D-FLASH pulse-sequence (TE/TR=0.53/1.63 ms, flip angle=17 degrees , acquisition matrix=128 x 104 voxels, strong fat saturation, PAT factor=2 (GRAPPA) and 400 mm x 325 mm FOV). Each dynamic dataset consisted of 18 slices of 7.5mm thickness (no gap) and an in-plane resolution of 3.1 mm x 3.1mm, acquired every 2.5s for not less than 5 minutes. During the MR scan a dose of 0.05 m mol (0.1 mL)kg(-1) body weight of dimeglumine gadopentetate (Magnevist) was injected intravenously (2 mLs(-1) injection rate), followed by a 15 mL saline flush at the same rate, using a MR-compatible automated injector (Spectris). Two AIFs were defined for each volunteer by drawing two ROIs in the aorta for each study. Renal perfusion and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) values were then calculated for each of the AIFs using a modified Tofts Renal Model (TRM). Both renal perfusion and GFR were expressed in mL min(-1)100 mL(-1) of tissue. RESULTS AND
CONCLUSION: Inter-individual reproducibility tests for renal perfusion and glomerular filtration rate showed that the size of AIF ROIs significantly affects calculated values of perfusion and GFR (p-values <0.02). No significant differences were observed when comparing perfusion and GFR values in the same volunteer between scans performed on different days (p-values >0.22). From our study we conclude that while DCE-MRI derived indices of renal function are reproducible in the same individual when imaged on different days, the size of the aortic ROI and hence the AIF has a significant influence on calculated renal perfusion and GFR values. Currently there is no accepted standard for drawing the aortic ROI and no standardized approach for the AIF definition in renal DCE-MRI studies. Copyright (c) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19541441     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.05.041

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Radiol        ISSN: 0720-048X            Impact factor:   3.528


  19 in total

1.  UMMPerfusion: an open source software tool towards quantitative MRI perfusion analysis in clinical routine.

Authors:  Frank G Zöllner; Gerald Weisser; Marcel Reich; Sven Kaiser; Stefan O Schoenberg; Steven P Sourbron; Lothar R Schad
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Radiologic-pathologic analysis of quantitative 3D tumour enhancement on contrast-enhanced MR imaging: a study of ROI placement.

Authors:  Arun Chockalingam; Rafael Duran; Jae Ho Sohn; Rüdiger Schernthaner; Julius Chapiro; Howard Lee; Sonia Sahu; Sonny Nguyen; Jean-François Geschwind; MingDe Lin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-05-21       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Comparison of ASL and DCE MRI for the non-invasive measurement of renal blood flow: quantification and reproducibility.

Authors:  Marica Cutajar; David L Thomas; Patrick W Hales; T Banks; Christopher A Clark; Isky Gordon
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-03-06       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Oncologic Angiogenesis Imaging in the clinic---how and why.

Authors:  Karen A Kurdziel; Liza Lindenberg; Peter L Choyke
Journal:  Imaging Med       Date:  2011-09

5.  Sampling arterial input function (AIF) from peripheral arteries: Comparison of a temporospatial-feature based method against conventional manual method.

Authors:  Xiaowan Li; Christopher C Conlin; Stephen T Decker; Nan Hu; Michelle Mueller; Lillian Khor; Christopher Hanrahan; Gwenael Layec; Vivian S Lee; Jeff L Zhang
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-11-22       Impact factor: 2.546

6.  Precise measurement of renal filtration and vascular parameters using a two-compartment model for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the kidney gives realistic normal values.

Authors:  Paul S Tofts; Marica Cutajar; Iosif A Mendichovszky; A Michael Peters; Isky Gordon
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 7.  Quantitative renal magnetic resonance imaging: magnetic resonance urography.

Authors:  J Damien Grattan-Smith; Jeanne Chow; Sila Kurugol; Richard Alan Jones
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2022-01-13

Review 8.  Functional MRI of the kidneys.

Authors:  Jeff L Zhang; Henry Rusinek; Hersh Chandarana; Vivian S Lee
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.813

9.  Reproducibility of magnetic resonance perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Xiaomeng Zhang; Mark D Pagel; Amanda F Baker; Robert J Gillies
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-25       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  New magnetic resonance imaging methods in nephrology.

Authors:  Jeff L Zhang; Glen Morrell; Henry Rusinek; Eric E Sigmund; Hersh Chandarana; Lilach O Lerman; Pottumarthi V Prasad; David Niles; Nathan Artz; Sean Fain; Pierre-Hugues Vivier; Alfred K Cheung; Vivian S Lee
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2013-09-25       Impact factor: 10.612

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.