Pierluigi Ciet1,2,3, Goffredo Serra4, Silvia Bertolo1, Sandra Spronk3,5, Mirco Ros6, Francesco Fraioli7, Serena Quattrucci8, M Baroukh Assael9, Carlo Catalano4, Fabio Pomerri10, Harm A W M Tiddens2,3, Giovanni Morana11. 1. Radiology Department, General Hospital Ca' Foncello, Treviso, Italy. 2. Pediatric Pulmonology Erasmus MC, Sophia Children's Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Radiology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Radiology, University of Rome "Sapienza", Rome, Italy. 5. Epidemiology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 6. Pediatrics, Ca' Foncello Hospital, Treviso, Italy. 7. Institute of Nuclear Medicine, University College London (UCL), London, UK. 8. Pediatrics, University of Rome Sapienza, Rome, Italy. 9. Verona CF Center, Azienda Ospedaliera di Verona, Verona, Italy. 10. Department of Medicine-DIMED, University of Padova, Padova, Italy. 11. Radiology Department, General Hospital Ca' Foncello, Treviso, Italy. gmorana@ulss.tv.it.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To date, PROPELLER MRI, a breathing-motion-insensitive technique, has not been assessed for cystic fibrosis (CF) lung disease. We compared this technique to CT for assessing CF lung disease in children and adults. METHODS: Thirty-eight stable CF patients (median 21 years, range 6-51 years, 22 female) underwent MRI and CT on the same day. Study protocol included respiratory-triggered PROPELLER MRI and volumetric CT end-inspiratory and -expiratory acquisitions. Two observers scored the images using the CF-MRI and CF-CT systems. Scores were compared with intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots. The sensitivity and specificity of MRI versus CT were calculated. RESULTS: MRI sensitivity for detecting severe CF bronchiectasis was 0.33 (CI 0.09-0.57), while specificity was 100% (CI 0.88-1). ICCs for bronchiectasis and trapped air were as follows: MRI-bronchiectasis (0.79); CT-bronchiectasis (0.85); MRI-trapped air (0.51); CT-trapped air (0.87). Bland-Altman plots showed an MRI tendency to overestimate the severity of bronchiectasis in mild CF disease and underestimate bronchiectasis in severe disease. CONCLUSIONS: Motion correction in PROPELLER MRI does not improve assessment of CF lung disease compared to CT. However, the good inter- and intra-observer agreement and the high specificity suggest that MRI might play a role in the short-term follow-up of CF lung disease (i.e. pulmonary exacerbations). KEY POINTS: PROPELLER MRI does not match CT sensitivity to assess CF lung disease. PROPELLER MRI has lower sensitivity than CT to detect severe bronchiectasis. PROPELLER MRI has good to very good intra- and inter-observer variability. PROPELLER MRI can be used for short-term follow-up studies in CF.
OBJECTIVES: To date, PROPELLER MRI, a breathing-motion-insensitive technique, has not been assessed for cystic fibrosis (CF) lung disease. We compared this technique to CT for assessing CF lung disease in children and adults. METHODS: Thirty-eight stable CF patients (median 21 years, range 6-51 years, 22 female) underwent MRI and CT on the same day. Study protocol included respiratory-triggered PROPELLER MRI and volumetric CT end-inspiratory and -expiratory acquisitions. Two observers scored the images using the CF-MRI and CF-CT systems. Scores were compared with intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots. The sensitivity and specificity of MRI versus CT were calculated. RESULTS: MRI sensitivity for detecting severe CF bronchiectasis was 0.33 (CI 0.09-0.57), while specificity was 100% (CI 0.88-1). ICCs for bronchiectasis and trapped air were as follows: MRI-bronchiectasis (0.79); CT-bronchiectasis (0.85); MRI-trapped air (0.51); CT-trapped air (0.87). Bland-Altman plots showed an MRI tendency to overestimate the severity of bronchiectasis in mild CF disease and underestimate bronchiectasis in severe disease. CONCLUSIONS: Motion correction in PROPELLER MRI does not improve assessment of CF lung disease compared to CT. However, the good inter- and intra-observer agreement and the high specificity suggest that MRI might play a role in the short-term follow-up of CF lung disease (i.e. pulmonary exacerbations). KEY POINTS: PROPELLER MRI does not match CT sensitivity to assess CF lung disease. PROPELLER MRI has lower sensitivity than CT to detect severe bronchiectasis. PROPELLER MRI has good to very good intra- and inter-observer variability. PROPELLER MRI can be used for short-term follow-up studies in CF.
Authors: Claire E Wainwright; Suzanna Vidmar; David S Armstrong; Catherine A Byrnes; John B Carlin; Joyce Cheney; Peter J Cooper; Keith Grimwood; Marj Moodie; Colin F Robertson; Harm A Tiddens Journal: JAMA Date: 2011-07-13 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Anne-Sophie Bonnel; Samuel Moon-Ho Song; Krishnaveni Kesavarju; Manisha Newaskar; Craig J Paxton; Daniel A Bloch; Richard B Moss; Terry E Robinson Journal: Pediatr Pulmonol Date: 2004-11
Authors: Ethan K Brodsky; Eric M Bultman; Kevin M Johnson; Debra E Horng; William R Schelman; Walter F Block; Scott B Reeder Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Smitha Rajaram; Andrew J Swift; David Capener; Adam Telfer; Christine Davies; Catherine Hill; Robin Condliffe; Charles Elliot; Judith Hurdman; David G Kiely; Jim M Wild Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-03-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: David J Roach; Yannick Crémillieux; Robert J Fleck; Alan S Brody; Suraj D Serai; Rhonda D Szczesniak; Stephanie Kerlakian; John P Clancy; Jason C Woods Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2016-11
Authors: Sarath C Ranganathan; Graham L Hall; Peter D Sly; Stephen M Stick; Tonia A Douglas Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2017-06-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Martina Pecoraro; Stefano Cipollari; Livia Marchitelli; Emanuele Messina; Maurizio Del Monte; Nicola Galea; Maria Rosa Ciardi; Marco Francone; Carlo Catalano; Valeria Panebianco Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2021-07-12 Impact factor: 3.469