Keitaro Sofue1,2, Achille Mileto1, Brian M Dale3, Xiaodong Zhong4, Mustafa R Bashir1,5. 1. Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 2. Department of Radiology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan. 3. Siemens Healthcare, Morrisville, North Carolina, USA. 4. Siemens Healthcare, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 5. Center for Advanced Magnetic Resonance Development, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the interexamination repeatability and spatial heterogeneity of liver iron and fat measurements using a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based multistep adaptive fitting algorithm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective observational study was Institutional Review Board-approved and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant. Written informed consent was waived. In all, 150 subjects were imaged on 3T MRI systems. A whole-liver volume acquisition was performed twice using a six-echo 3D spoiled gradient echo sequence during two immediately adjacent examinations. Colocalized regions of interest (ROIs) in three different hepatic segments were placed for R2 * and proton density fat fraction (PDFF) measurements by two readers independently. Mean R2 * and PDFF values between readers and acquisitions were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), linear regression, Bland-Altman analysis, and analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: The mean R2 * and PDFF values across all ROIs and measurements were 51.2 ± 25.2 s(-1) and 6.9 ± 6.4%, respectively. Mean R2 * and PDFF values showed no significant differences between the two acquisitions (P = 0.05-0.87). Between the two acquisitions, R2 * and PDFF values demonstrated almost perfect agreement (ICCs = 0.979-0.994) and excellent correlation (R(2) = 0.958-0.989). Bland-Altman analysis also demonstrated excellent agreement. In the ANOVA, the individual patient and ROI location were significant effects for both R2 * and PDFF values (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: MRI-based R2 * and PDFF measurements are repeatable between examinations. Between-measurement changes in R2 * of more than 10.1 s(-1) and in PDFF of more than 1.7% are likely due to actual tissue changes. Liver iron and fat content are variable between hepatic segments.
PURPOSE: To assess the interexamination repeatability and spatial heterogeneity of liver iron and fat measurements using a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based multistep adaptive fitting algorithm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective observational study was Institutional Review Board-approved and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant. Written informed consent was waived. In all, 150 subjects were imaged on 3T MRI systems. A whole-liver volume acquisition was performed twice using a six-echo 3D spoiled gradient echo sequence during two immediately adjacent examinations. Colocalized regions of interest (ROIs) in three different hepatic segments were placed for R2 * and proton density fat fraction (PDFF) measurements by two readers independently. Mean R2 * and PDFF values between readers and acquisitions were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), linear regression, Bland-Altman analysis, and analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: The mean R2 * and PDFF values across all ROIs and measurements were 51.2 ± 25.2 s(-1) and 6.9 ± 6.4%, respectively. Mean R2 * and PDFF values showed no significant differences between the two acquisitions (P = 0.05-0.87). Between the two acquisitions, R2 * and PDFF values demonstrated almost perfect agreement (ICCs = 0.979-0.994) and excellent correlation (R(2) = 0.958-0.989). Bland-Altman analysis also demonstrated excellent agreement. In the ANOVA, the individual patient and ROI location were significant effects for both R2 * and PDFF values (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: MRI-based R2 * and PDFF measurements are repeatable between examinations. Between-measurement changes in R2 * of more than 10.1 s(-1) and in PDFF of more than 1.7% are likely due to actual tissue changes. Liver iron and fat content are variable between hepatic segments.
Authors: Camilo A Campo; Diego Hernando; Tilman Schubert; Candice A Bookwalter; Andrew J Van Pay; Scott B Reeder Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2017-07-13 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Takeshi Yokoo; Suraj D Serai; Ali Pirasteh; Mustafa R Bashir; Gavin Hamilton; Diego Hernando; Houchun H Hu; Holger Hetterich; Jens-Peter Kühn; Guido M Kukuk; Rohit Loomba; Michael S Middleton; Nancy A Obuchowski; Ji Soo Song; An Tang; Xinhuai Wu; Scott B Reeder; Claude B Sirlin Journal: Radiology Date: 2017-09-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jonathan C Hooker; Gavin Hamilton; Charlie C Park; Steven Liao; Tanya Wolfson; Soudabeh Fazeli Dehkordy; Cheng William Hong; Adrija Mamidipalli; Anthony Gamst; Rohit Loomba; Claude B Sirlin Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2019-02
Authors: Soudabeh Fazeli Dehkordy; Kathryn J Fowler; Adrija Mamidipalli; Tanya Wolfson; Cheng William Hong; Yesenia Covarrubias; Jonathan C Hooker; Ethan Z Sy; Alexandra N Schlein; Jennifer Y Cui; Anthony C Gamst; Gavin Hamilton; Scott B Reeder; Claude B Sirlin Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-12-13 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Jan Syväri; Daniela Junker; Lisa Patzelt; Katharina Kappo; Loubna Al Sadat; Sonia Erfanian; Marcus R Makowski; Hans Hauner; Dimitrios C Karampinos Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2021-05
Authors: Houchun H Hu; Takeshi Yokoo; Mustafa R Bashir; Claude B Sirlin; Diego Hernando; Dariya Malyarenko; Thomas L Chenevert; Mark A Smith; Suraj D Serai; Michael S Middleton; Walter C Henderson; Gavin Hamilton; Jean Shaffer; Yunhong Shu; Jean A Tkach; Andrew T Trout; Nancy Obuchowski; Jean H Brittain; Edward F Jackson; Scott B Reeder Journal: Radiology Date: 2021-01-19 Impact factor: 11.105