Avishkar Tyagi1, Omid Yeganeh2, Yakir Levin2, Jonathan C Hooker2, Gavin C Hamilton2, Tanya Wolfson3, Anthony Gamst3, Amir K Zand2, Elhamy Heba2, Rohit Loomba4,5, Jeffrey Schwimmer2,6,7, Michael S Middleton2, Claude B Sirlin8. 1. Liver Imaging Group, MR3T Bydder Laboratory, Department of Radiology, University of California at San Diego, 408 Dickinson Street MC 8226, San Diego, CA, 92103-8226, USA. avishkar.tyagi@gmail.com. 2. Liver Imaging Group, MR3T Bydder Laboratory, Department of Radiology, University of California at San Diego, 408 Dickinson Street MC 8226, San Diego, CA, 92103-8226, USA. 3. Computational and Applied Statistics Laboratory (CASL), SDSC - University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA. 4. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA. 5. Division of Epidemiology, Department of Family Medicine and Preventive Medicine, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA. 6. Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Department of Pediatrics, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of California at San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA. 7. Department of Gastroenterology, Rady Children's Hospital, San Diego, CA, USA. 8. Liver Imaging Group, MR3T Bydder Laboratory, Department of Radiology, University of California at San Diego, 408 Dickinson Street MC 8226, San Diego, CA, 92103-8226, USA. csirlin@ucsd.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Determine intra- and inter-examination repeatability of magnitude-based magnetic resonance imaging (MRI-M), complex-based magnetic resonance imaging (MRI-C), and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) at 3T for estimating hepatic proton density fat fraction (PDFF), and using MRS as a reference, confirm MRI-M and MRI-C accuracy. METHODS: Twenty-nine overweight and obese pediatric (n = 20) and adult (n = 9) subjects (23 male, 6 female) underwent three same-day 3T MR examinations. In each examination MRI-M, MRI-C, and single-voxel MRS were acquired three times. For each MRI acquisition, hepatic PDFF was estimated at the MRS voxel location. Intra- and inter-examination repeatability were assessed by computing standard deviations (SDs) and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs). Aggregate SD was computed for each method as the square root of the average of first repeat variances. MRI-M and MRI-C PDFF estimation accuracy was assessed using linear regression with MRS as a reference. RESULTS: For MRI-M, MRI-C, and MRS acquisitions, respectively, mean intra-examination SDs were 0.25%, 0.42%, and 0.49%; mean intra-examination ICCs were 0.999, 0.997, and 0.995; mean inter-examination SDs were 0.42%, 0.45%, and 0.46%; and inter-examination ICCs were 0.995, 0.992, and 0.990. Aggregate SD for each method was <0.9%. Using MRS as a reference, regression slope, intercept, average bias, and R (2), respectively, for MRI-M were 0.99%, 1.73%, 1.61%, and 0.986, and for MRI-C were 0.96%, 0.43%, 0.40%, and 0.991. CONCLUSION: MRI-M, MRI-C, and MRS showed high intra- and inter-examination hepatic PDFF estimation repeatability in overweight and obese subjects. Longitudinal hepatic PDFF change >1.8% (twice the maximum aggregate SD) may represent real change rather than measurement imprecision. Further research is needed to assess whether examinations performed on different days or with different MR technologists affect repeatability of MRS voxel placement and MRS-based PDFF measurements.
PURPOSE: Determine intra- and inter-examination repeatability of magnitude-based magnetic resonance imaging (MRI-M), complex-based magnetic resonance imaging (MRI-C), and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) at 3T for estimating hepatic proton density fat fraction (PDFF), and using MRS as a reference, confirm MRI-M and MRI-C accuracy. METHODS: Twenty-nine overweight and obese pediatric (n = 20) and adult (n = 9) subjects (23 male, 6 female) underwent three same-day 3T MR examinations. In each examination MRI-M, MRI-C, and single-voxel MRS were acquired three times. For each MRI acquisition, hepatic PDFF was estimated at the MRS voxel location. Intra- and inter-examination repeatability were assessed by computing standard deviations (SDs) and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs). Aggregate SD was computed for each method as the square root of the average of first repeat variances. MRI-M and MRI-C PDFF estimation accuracy was assessed using linear regression with MRS as a reference. RESULTS: For MRI-M, MRI-C, and MRS acquisitions, respectively, mean intra-examination SDs were 0.25%, 0.42%, and 0.49%; mean intra-examination ICCs were 0.999, 0.997, and 0.995; mean inter-examination SDs were 0.42%, 0.45%, and 0.46%; and inter-examination ICCs were 0.995, 0.992, and 0.990. Aggregate SD for each method was <0.9%. Using MRS as a reference, regression slope, intercept, average bias, and R (2), respectively, for MRI-M were 0.99%, 1.73%, 1.61%, and 0.986, and for MRI-C were 0.96%, 0.43%, 0.40%, and 0.991. CONCLUSION: MRI-M, MRI-C, and MRS showed high intra- and inter-examination hepatic PDFF estimation repeatability in overweight and obese subjects. Longitudinal hepatic PDFF change >1.8% (twice the maximum aggregate SD) may represent real change rather than measurement imprecision. Further research is needed to assess whether examinations performed on different days or with different MR technologists affect repeatability of MRS voxel placement and MRS-based PDFF measurements.
Authors: Jens-Peter Kühn; Diego Hernando; Birger Mensel; Paul C Krüger; Till Ittermann; Julia Mayerle; Norbert Hosten; Scott B Reeder Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2013-10-10 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Geraldine H Kang; Irene Cruite; Masoud Shiehmorteza; Tanya Wolfson; Anthony C Gamst; Gavin Hamilton; Mark Bydder; Michael S Middleton; Claude B Sirlin Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2011-07-18 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: An Tang; Justin Tan; Mark Sun; Gavin Hamilton; Mark Bydder; Tanya Wolfson; Anthony C Gamst; Michael Middleton; Elizabeth M Brunt; Rohit Loomba; Joel E Lavine; Jeffrey B Schwimmer; Claude B Sirlin Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-02-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Benjamin L Johnson; Michael E Schroeder; Tanya Wolfson; Anthony C Gamst; Gavin Hamilton; Masoud Shiehmorteza; Rohit Loomba; Jeffrey B Schwimmer; Scott Reeder; Michael S Middleton; Claude B Sirlin Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2013-04-17 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Thuy-Anh Le; Joshua Chen; Christopher Changchien; Michael R Peterson; Yuko Kono; Heather Patton; Benjamin L Cohen; David Brenner; Claude Sirlin; Rohit Loomba Journal: Hepatology Date: 2012-07-02 Impact factor: 17.425
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: Adrija Mamidipalli; Kathryn J Fowler; Gavin Hamilton; Tanya Wolfson; Yesenia Covarrubias; Calvin Tran; Soudabeh Fazeli; Curtis N Wiens; Alan McMillan; Nathan S Artz; Luke M Funk; Guilherme M Campos; Jacob A Greenberg; Anthony Gamst; Michael S Middleton; Jeffrey B Schwimmer; Scott B Reeder; Claude B Sirlin Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2020-04-21 Impact factor: 5.315
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: Yingzhen N Zhang; Kathryn J Fowler; Gavin Hamilton; Jennifer Y Cui; Ethan Z Sy; Michelle Balanay; Jonathan C Hooker; Nikolaus Szeverenyi; Claude B Sirlin Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2018-06-06 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Cheng William Hong; Adrija Mamidipalli; Jonathan C Hooker; Gavin Hamilton; Tanya Wolfson; Dennis H Chen; Soudabeh Fazeli Dehkordy; Michael S Middleton; Scott B Reeder; Rohit Loomba; Claude B Sirlin Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-08-29 Impact factor: 4.813