| Literature DB >> 25436458 |
Pu-Xuan Lu1, Hua Huang1, Jing Yuan2, Feng Zhao2, Zhi-Yi Chen3, Qinwei Zhang2, Anil T Ahuja2, Bo-Ping Zhou4, Yì-Xiáng J Wáng2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study was aimed to determine whether pure molecular-based diffusion coefficient (D) and perfusion-related diffusion parameters (perfusion fraction f, perfusion-related diffusion coefficient D*) differ in healthy livers and fibrotic livers through intra-voxel incoherent motion (IVIM) MR imaging.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25436458 PMCID: PMC4250077 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113846
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Region of interest (ROI) on the b = 0 diffusion weighted MR image (left) and the corresponding IVIM fitted curve of measured signal (right), showing a bi-exponential decay.
The ROI was placed over the whole liver avoiding artifacts and blood.
Figure 2D, f, and D* values in healthy livers and fibrotic livers.
D, f, and D* are significantly lower in fibrotic livers than in healthy livers.
Pure molecular diffusion (D), perfusion fraction (f), and perfusion-related diffusion (D*) values in different stages of fibrotic livers.
| Patients |
|
|
|
| stage 1 (n = 14) | 0.981±0.138 | 0.145±0.028 | 10.584±1.872 |
| stage 2 (n = 8) | 0.833±0.146 | 0.119±0.014 | 9.028±1.290 |
| stage 3&4 (n = 12) | 0.898±0.152 | 0.100±0.014 | 8.332±0.851 |
|
| 0.074 | <0.001 | 0.001 |
|
| 0.154 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
p-value<0.05 comparing stage 2 or stage 3&4 with stage 1, with Bonferroni adjustment for multiple comparisons.
p-value with Bonferroni adjustment for comparison of pure molecular diffusion (D), perfusion fraction (f), and perfusion-related diffusion (D*) values in different stages of fibrotic livers.
| p-value with Bonferroni adjustment |
|
|
|
| stage 1 vs 2 | 0.083 | 0.024 | 0.065 |
| stage 1 vs 3&4 | 0.462 | <0.001 | 0.001 |
| stage 2 vs 3&4 | 0.995 | 0.184 | 0.903 |