Benjamin Leporq1, Hélène Ratiney, Frank Pilleul, Olivier Beuf. 1. CREATIS, CNRS UMR 5220, Inserm U1044, INSA-Lyon, Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, bât. 308, 43, Boulevard du 11 Novembre 1918, 69616, Villeurbanne, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To validate a magnitude-based method for fat volume fraction (FVF) quantification in the liver without any dominant component ambiguity problems and with the aim of transferring this method to any imaging system (clinical fields of 1.5 and 3.0 T). METHODS: MR imaging was performed at 1.5 and 3.0 T using a multiple-angle multiple-gradient echo sequence. A quantification algorithm correcting for relaxation time effects using a disjointed estimation of T1 and T2* of fat and water and accounting for the NMR spectrum of fat was developed. Validations were performed on fat-water emulsion at 1.5 and 3.0 T and compared with (1)H-MRS. This was followed by a prospective in-vivo comparative study on 28 patients with chronic liver disease and included histology. RESULTS: Phantom study showed good agreement between MRI and MRS. MR-estimated FVF and histological results correlated strongly and FVF allowed the diagnosis of mild (cutoff = 5.5 %) and moderate steatosis (cutoff = 15.2 %) with a sensitivity/specificity of 100 %. CONCLUSION: FVF calculation worked independently of the field strength. FVF may be a relevant biomarker for the clinical follow-up of patients (1) with or at risk of NAFLD (2) of steatosis in patients with other chronic liver diseases. KEY POINTS: • Non-invasive techniques to diagnose non-alcoholic fatty liver diseases (NAFLD) are important. • Liver fat volume fraction quantified using MRI correlates well with histology. • Fat volume fraction could be a relevant marker for NAFLD clinical follow-up. • Disjointed relaxation time estimation could potentially identify factors contributing to NAFLD.
OBJECTIVE: To validate a magnitude-based method for fat volume fraction (FVF) quantification in the liver without any dominant component ambiguity problems and with the aim of transferring this method to any imaging system (clinical fields of 1.5 and 3.0 T). METHODS: MR imaging was performed at 1.5 and 3.0 T using a multiple-angle multiple-gradient echo sequence. A quantification algorithm correcting for relaxation time effects using a disjointed estimation of T1 and T2* of fat and water and accounting for the NMR spectrum of fat was developed. Validations were performed on fat-water emulsion at 1.5 and 3.0 T and compared with (1)H-MRS. This was followed by a prospective in-vivo comparative study on 28 patients with chronic liver disease and included histology. RESULTS: Phantom study showed good agreement between MRI and MRS. MR-estimated FVF and histological results correlated strongly and FVF allowed the diagnosis of mild (cutoff = 5.5 %) and moderate steatosis (cutoff = 15.2 %) with a sensitivity/specificity of 100 %. CONCLUSION: FVF calculation worked independently of the field strength. FVF may be a relevant biomarker for the clinical follow-up of patients (1) with or at risk of NAFLD (2) of steatosis in patients with other chronic liver diseases. KEY POINTS: • Non-invasive techniques to diagnose non-alcoholic fatty liver diseases (NAFLD) are important. • Liver fat volume fraction quantified using MRI correlates well with histology. • Fat volume fraction could be a relevant marker for NAFLD clinical follow-up. • Disjointed relaxation time estimation could potentially identify factors contributing to NAFLD.
Authors: Lidia S Szczepaniak; Pamela Nurenberg; David Leonard; Jeffrey D Browning; Jason S Reingold; Scott Grundy; Helen H Hobbs; Robert L Dobbins Journal: Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab Date: 2004-08-31 Impact factor: 4.310
Authors: Huanzhou Yu; Ann Shimakawa; Charles A McKenzie; Ethan Brodsky; Jean H Brittain; Scott B Reeder Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Benjamin Leporq; Arnaud Le Troter; Yann Le Fur; Emmanuelle Salort-Campana; Maxime Guye; Olivier Beuf; Shahram Attarian; David Bendahan Journal: MAGMA Date: 2017-03-22 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Mark Barahman; Eduardo Grunvald; Pablo J Prado; Alejandro Bussandri; Walter C Henderson; Tanya Wolfson; Kathryn J Fowler; Claude B Sirlin Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2022-05-25 Impact factor: 3.737
Authors: Ferenc E Mozes; Elizabeth M Tunnicliffe; Michael Pavlides; Matthew D Robson Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2016-01-13 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Tim G St Pierre; Michael J House; Sander J Bangma; Wenjie Pang; Andrew Bathgate; Eng K Gan; Oyekoya T Ayonrinde; Prithi S Bhathal; Andrew Clouston; John K Olynyk; Leon A Adams Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-08-08 Impact factor: 3.240