Literature DB >> 24475860

Liver diffusion-weighted MR imaging: reproducibility comparison of ADC measurements obtained with multiple breath-hold, free-breathing, respiratory-triggered, and navigator-triggered techniques.

Xin Chen1, Lei Qin, Dan Pan, Yanqi Huang, Lifen Yan, Guangyi Wang, Yubao Liu, Changhong Liang, Zaiyi Liu.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the reproducibility of normal liver apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements by using different respiratory motion compensation techniques with multiple breath-hold (MBH), free-breathing (FB), respiratory-triggered (RT), and navigator-triggered (NT) diffusion-weighted (DW) imaging and to compare the ADCs at different liver anatomic locations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board, and written informed consent was obtained from each participant. Thirty-nine volunteers underwent liver DW imaging twice. Imaging was performed with a 1.5-T MR imager with MBH, FB, RT, and NT techniques (b = 0, 100, and 500 sec/mm(2)). Three representative sections--superior, central, and inferior--were selected on left and right liver lobes, respectively. On each selected section, three regions of interest were drawn, and ADCs were measured. Analysis of variance was used to assess ADCs among the four techniques and various anatomic locations. Reproducibility of ADCs was assessed with the Bland-Altman method.
RESULTS: ADCs obtained with MBH (range: right lobe, [1.641-1.662] × 10(-3)mm(2)/sec; left lobe, [2.034-2.054] ×10(-3)mm(2)/sec) were higher than those obtained with FB (right, [1.349-1.391] ×10(-3)mm(2)/sec; left, [1.630-1.700] ×10(-3)mm(2)/sec), RT (right, [1.439-1.455] ×10(-3)mm(2)/sec; left, [1.720-1.755] ×10(-3)mm(2)/sec), or NT (right, [1.387-1.400] ×10(-3)mm(2)/sec; left, [1.661-1.736] ×10(-3)mm(2)/sec) techniques (P < .001); however, no significant difference was observed between ADCs obtained with FB, RT, and NT techniques (P = .130 to P >.99). ADCs showed a trend to decrease moving from left to right. Reproducibility in the left liver lobe was inferior to that in the right, and the central middle segment in the right lobe had the most reproducible ADC. Statistical differences in ADCs were observed in the left-right direction in the right lobe (P < .001), but they were not observed in the superior-inferior direction (P = .144-.450). However, in the left liver lobe, statistical differences existed in both directions (P = .001 to P = .016 in the left-right direction, P < .001 in the superior-inferior direction).
CONCLUSION: Both anatomic location and DW imaging technique influence liver ADC measurements and their reproducibility. FB DW imaging is recommended for liver DW imaging because of its good reproducibility and shorter acquisition time compared with that of MBH, RT, and NT techniques. RSNA, 2014

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24475860     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13131572

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  26 in total

Review 1.  Diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging and its recent trend-a survey.

Authors:  Geetha Soujanya Chilla; Cher Heng Tan; Chenjie Xu; Chueh Loo Poh
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2015-06

2.  Test-retest reliability of diffusion tensor imaging of the liver at 3.0 T.

Authors:  Rossano Girometti; Marta Maieron; Giovanni Lissandrello; Massimo Bazzocchi; Chiara Zuiani
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2014-11-25       Impact factor: 3.469

3.  The diagnostic efficacy of quantitative liver MR imaging with diffusion-weighted, SWI, and hepato-specific contrast-enhanced sequences in staging liver fibrosis--a multiparametric approach.

Authors:  Diana Feier; Csilla Balassy; Nina Bastati; Romana Fragner; Friedrich Wrba; Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-05-21       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 4.  Diffusion MRI of cancer: From low to high b-values.

Authors:  Lei Tang; Xiaohong Joe Zhou
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-10-12       Impact factor: 4.813

5.  Evaluation of simultaneous-multislice diffusion-weighted imaging of liver at 3.0 T with different breathing schemes.

Authors:  Yigang Pei; Siming Xie; Wenzheng Li; Xianjing Peng; Qin Qin; Qian Ye; Mengsi Li; Jiaxi Hu; Jiale Hou; Guijing Li; Shuo Hu
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-11

6.  Liver histology and diffusion-weighted MRI in children with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: A MAGNET study.

Authors:  Paul Manning; Paul Murphy; Kang Wang; Jonathan Hooker; Tanya Wolfson; Michael S Middleton; Kimberly P Newton; Cynthia Behling; Hannah I Awai; Janis Durelle; Melissa N Paiz; Jorge E Angeles; Diana De La Pena; J Allen McCutchan; Jeffrey B Schwimmer; Claude B Sirlin
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2017-02-22       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 7.  Advances in diffusion-weighted imaging.

Authors:  Lorenzo Mannelli; Stephanie Nougaret; Hebert A Vargas; Richard K G Do
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 2.303

Review 8.  Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in cancer: Reported apparent diffusion coefficients, in-vitro and in-vivo reproducibility.

Authors:  Maysam M Jafar; Arman Parsai; Marc E Miquel
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2016-01-28

9.  Assessment of Ileocolonic Inflammation in Crohn's Disease: Which Surrogate Marker Is Better-MaRIA, Clermont, or PET/MR Index? Initial Results of a Feasibility Trial.

Authors:  Yan Li; Jost Langhorst; Anna Katharina Koch; Aydin Demircioglu; Felix Nensa; Julian Kirchner; Karsten Beiderwellen; Onofrio Catalano; Michael Forsting; Ken Herrmann; Lale Umutlu
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2018-11-02       Impact factor: 10.057

10.  Diffusion kurtosis imaging (DKI) of hepatocellular carcinoma: correlation with microvascular invasion and histologic grade.

Authors:  Likun Cao; Jie Chen; Ting Duan; Min Wang; Hanyu Jiang; Yi Wei; Chunchao Xia; Xiaoyue Zhou; Xu Yan; Bin Song
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2019-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.