Harald Kramer1,2, Perry J Pickhardt2, Mark A Kliewer2, Diego Hernando2, Guang-Hong Chen2,3, James A Zagzebski2,3, Scott B Reeder2,3,4. 1. 1 Department of Clinical Radiology, University Hospitals Munich, Ludwig Maximilians University, Marchioninistr 15, 81377 Munich, Germany. 2. 2 Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI. 3. 3 Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI. 4. 4 Departments of Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the accuracy of proton-density fat-fraction, single- and dual-energy CT (SECT and DECT), gray-scale ultrasound (US), and US shear-wave elastography (US-SWE) in the quantification of hepatic steatosis with MR spectroscopy (MRS) as the reference standard. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Fifty adults who did not have symptoms (23 men, 27 women; mean age, 57 ± 5 years; body mass index, 27 ± 5) underwent liver imaging with un-enhanced SECT, DECT, gray-scale US, US-SWE, proton-density fat-fraction MRI, and MRS for this prospective trial. MRS voxels for the reference standard were colocalized with all other modalities under investigation. For SECT (120 kVp), attenuation values were recorded. For rapid-switching DECT (80/140 kVp), monochromatic images (70-140 keV) and fat density-derived material decomposition images were reconstructed. For proton-density fat fraction MRI, a quantitative chemical shift-encoded method was used. For US, echogenicity was evaluated on a qualitative 0-3 scale. Quantitative US shear-wave velocities were also recorded. Data were analyzed by linear regression for each technique compared with MRS. RESULTS: There was excellent correlation between MRS and both proton-density fat-fraction MRI (r2 = 0.992; slope, 0.974; intercept, -0.943) and SECT (r2 = 0.856; slope, -0.559; intercept, 35.418). DECT fat attenuation had moderate correlation with MRS measurements (r2 = 0.423; slope, 0.034; intercept, 8.459). There was good correlation between qualitative US echogenicity and MRS measurements with a weighted kappa value of 0.82. US-SWE velocity did not have reliable correlation with MRS measurements (r2 = 0.004; slope, 0.069; intercept, 6.168). CONCLUSION: Quantitative MRI proton-density fat fraction and SECT fat attenuation have excellent linear correlation with MRS measurements and can serve as accurate noninvasive biomarkers for quantifying steatosis. Material decomposition with DECT does not improve the accuracy of fat quantification over conventional SECT attenuation. US-SWE has poor accuracy for liver fat quantification.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the accuracy of proton-density fat-fraction, single- and dual-energy CT (SECT and DECT), gray-scale ultrasound (US), and US shear-wave elastography (US-SWE) in the quantification of hepatic steatosis with MR spectroscopy (MRS) as the reference standard. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Fifty adults who did not have symptoms (23 men, 27 women; mean age, 57 ± 5 years; body mass index, 27 ± 5) underwent liver imaging with un-enhanced SECT, DECT, gray-scale US, US-SWE, proton-density fat-fraction MRI, and MRS for this prospective trial. MRS voxels for the reference standard were colocalized with all other modalities under investigation. For SECT (120 kVp), attenuation values were recorded. For rapid-switching DECT (80/140 kVp), monochromatic images (70-140 keV) and fat density-derived material decomposition images were reconstructed. For proton-density fat fraction MRI, a quantitative chemical shift-encoded method was used. For US, echogenicity was evaluated on a qualitative 0-3 scale. Quantitative US shear-wave velocities were also recorded. Data were analyzed by linear regression for each technique compared with MRS. RESULTS: There was excellent correlation between MRS and both proton-density fat-fraction MRI (r2 = 0.992; slope, 0.974; intercept, -0.943) and SECT (r2 = 0.856; slope, -0.559; intercept, 35.418). DECT fat attenuation had moderate correlation with MRS measurements (r2 = 0.423; slope, 0.034; intercept, 8.459). There was good correlation between qualitative US echogenicity and MRS measurements with a weighted kappa value of 0.82. US-SWE velocity did not have reliable correlation with MRS measurements (r2 = 0.004; slope, 0.069; intercept, 6.168). CONCLUSION: Quantitative MRI proton-density fat fraction and SECT fat attenuation have excellent linear correlation with MRS measurements and can serve as accurate noninvasive biomarkers for quantifying steatosis. Material decomposition with DECT does not improve the accuracy of fat quantification over conventional SECT attenuation. US-SWE has poor accuracy for liver fat quantification.
Authors: Michael A Fischer; Daniel Nanz; Caecilia S Reiner; Matteo Montani; Stefan Breitenstein; Sebastian Leschka; Hatem Alkadhi; Paul Stolzmann; Borut Marincek; Hans Scheffel Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Paulo R S Mendonça; Peter Lamb; Andras Kriston; Kosuke Sasaki; Masayuki Kudo; Dushyant V Sahani Journal: Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv Date: 2013
Authors: Cynthia L Ogden; Margaret D Carroll; Lester R Curtin; Margaret A McDowell; Carolyn J Tabak; Katherine M Flegal Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-04-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Nathan S Artz; Catherine D G Hines; Stephen T Brunner; Rashmi M Agni; Jens-Peter Kühn; Alejandro Roldan-Alzate; Guang-Hong Chen; Scott B Reeder Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Catherine D G Hines; Huanzhou Yu; Ann Shimakawa; Charles A McKenzie; Jean H Brittain; Scott B Reeder Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Jeffrey B Schwimmer; Winston Dunn; Gregory J Norman; Perrie E Pardee; Michael S Middleton; Nanda Kerkar; Claude B Sirlin Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2010-01-11 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Sanjeev R Mehta; Elizabeth Louise Thomas; Nayna Patel; Mary E Crofton; John McCarthy; Joseph Eliahoo; Stanislas X Morin; Julie Fitzpatrick; Giuliana Durighel; Anthony P Goldstone; Desmond G Johnston; Jimmy D Bell; Simon D Taylor-Robinson Journal: Hepatol Res Date: 2010-03-04 Impact factor: 4.288
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: Ziying Yin; Matthew C Murphy; Jiahui Li; Kevin J Glaser; Amy S Mauer; Taofic Mounajjed; Terry M Therneau; Heshan Liu; Harmeet Malhi; Armando Manduca; Richard L Ehman; Meng Yin Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-03-18 Impact factor: 5.315
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: Trong N Nguyen; Anthony S Podkowa; Alex Y Tam; Eben C Arnold; Rita J Miller; Trevor H Park; Minh N Do; Michael L Oelze Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2019-05-08 Impact factor: 2.998
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