| Literature DB >> 29563601 |
Shivani Pahwa1, Hao Liu2, Yong Chen1, Sara Dastmalchian1, Gregory O'Connor1, Ziang Lu1, Chaitra Badve3, Alice Yu1, Katherine Wright1, Hamid Chalian3, Shengxiang Rao2, Caixia Fu4, Ignacio Vallines5, Mark Griswold1,6, Nicole Seiberlich6, Mengsu Zeng2, Vikas Gulani7,8.
Abstract
We describe multi-institutional experience using free-breathing, 3D Spiral GRAPPA-based quantitative perfusion MRI in characterizing neoplastic liver masses. 45 patients (age: 48-72 years) were prospectively recruited at University Hospitals, Cleveland, USA on a 3 Tesla (T) MRI, and at Zhongshan Hospital, Shanghai, China on a 1.5 T MRI. Contrast-enhanced volumetric T1-weighted images were acquired and a dual-input single-compartment model used to derive arterial fraction (AF), distribution volume (DV) and mean transit time (MTT) for the lesions and normal parenchyma. The measurements were compared using two-tailed Student's t-test, with Bonferroni correction applied for multiple-comparison testing. 28 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and 17 metastatic lesions were evaluated. No significant difference was noted in perfusion parameters of normal liver parenchyma and neoplastic masses at two centers (p = 0.62 for AF, 0.015 for DV, 0.42 for MTT for HCC, p = 0.13 for AF, 0.97 for DV, 0.78 for MTT for metastases). There was statistically significant difference in AF, DV, and MTT of metastases and AF and DV of HCC compared to normal liver parenchyma (p < 0.5/9 = 0.0055). A statistically significant difference was noted in the MTT of metastases compared to hepatocellular carcinoma (p < 0.001*10-5). In conclusion, 3D Spiral-GRAPPA enabled quantitative free-breathing perfusion MRI exam provides robust perfusion parameters.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29563601 PMCID: PMC5862961 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-20726-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Imaging parameters for through time spiral GRAPPA perfusion MRI examination.
| DCE MRI | |
|---|---|
| FOV*, mm | 360–440 |
| Matrix size | 192–240 |
| In-plane resolution, mm | 1.9 |
| TR/TE, milliseconds | 4.5–4.7/0.6 |
| Flip angle, degrees | 15 |
| Number of slices | 60 |
| Slice thickness, mm | 3 |
| Parallel imaging | 6 |
| Acquisition time per volume, seconds | 1.6–1.9 |
*FOV – field of view.
Figure 1Perfusion modeling in a patient with metastatic breast cancer. Arterial and portal input function (a), concentration-time curve of the lesion and surrounding tissue (b) for the lesion depicted in T1-weighted image (c). Perfusion modeling revealed the lesion to have an arterial fraction of 95.3%, distribution volume of 48.0% and mean transit time of 96.6 seconds. The corresponding values for the liver parenchyma were arterial fraction of 16.9%, distribution volume of 30.8% and mean transit time of 5.2 seconds.
Summary of comparisons between perfusion parameters between normal liver parenchyma, metastatic adenocarcinoma, and hepatocellular carcinoma.
| Arterial Fraction (%) | Distribution Volume (%) | Mean Transit Time (seconds) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Normal (n = 10) | 25.0 ± 4.3 | 29.4 ± 8.3 | 8.8 ± 6.1 |
| Metastatic Adenocarcinoma | 79.1 ± 13.5 | 53.8 ± 25.0 | 41.3 ± 24.5 |
| Metastatic vs. normal (P value) | 6.37 × 10−14* | 0.0004* | 4.90 × 10−05* |
| Hepatocellular carcinoma | 72.1 ± 14.5 | 49.0 ± 20.5 | 11.3 ± 4.8 |
| HCC vs. normal (P value) | 2.69 × 10–17* | 0.0002* | 0.196 |
| Metastatic vs. HCC (P value) | 0.0932 | 0.466 | 0.000116* |
There was a statistically significant difference in AF, DV, and MTT* of metastatic lesions and AF and DV of HCC compared to normal liver parenchyma in healthy volunteers (p < 0.5/9 = 0.0055). A statistically significant difference was noted in the MTT of metastases compared to hepatocellular carcinoma (p < 0.001*10−5). *P value < 0.05/9 = 0.0055 after Bonferroni correction for multiple-comparisons.
*AF - Arterial fraction; DV- Distribution volume; MTT – Mean transit time.
Figure 2(a) Standard arterial phase VIBE image depicts an irregular liver contour in a patient with cirrhosis on surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma- no focal lesion is seen. (b) Spiral DCE acquisition performed 12 days after the clinical study depicts three arterially enhancing lesions. These lesions were detected in the follow up clinical exam performed 3 months after the first exam (c).
Summary of Liver Perfusion Parameters in patients scanned in USA at 3 T field strength and in China at 1.5 T field strength.
| Site of MRI exam | Number of patients | Surrounding tissue | Lesion | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arterial fraction (%) | Distribution volume (%) | Mean transit time (sec) | Arterial fraction (%) | Distribution volume (%) | Mean transit time (sec) | |||
| Met | US | 10 | 47.6 ± 12.2 | 34.7 ± 16.1 | 6.0 ± 3.5 | 83.1 ± 11.1* | 53.9 ± 12.7* | 42.8 ± 27.1* |
| China | 7 | 68.7 ± 6.3 | 27.4 ± 9.4 | 10.9 ± 2.3 | 73.9 ± 12.2 | 53.5 ± 31.5 | 39.2 ± 22.2* | |
| Mean | 17 | 53.6 ± 14.5# | 32.6 ± 14.5 | 7.4 ± 3.9 | 79.1 ± 13.5* | 53.8 ± 25.0* | 41.3 ± 24.5* | |
| HCC | US | 5 | 46.4 ± 22.6 | 34.9 ± 13.0 | 19.6 ± 9.2 | 75.0 ± 17.0* | 36.0 ± 8.6 | 12.9 ± 3.6* |
| China | 23 | 57.5 ± 18.2 | 35.4 ± 6.9 | 16.8 ± 8.2 | 71.4 ± 14.2* | 51.9 ± 21.3* | 10.9 ± 5.0* | |
| Mean | 28 | 54.8 ± 19.3# | 35.3 ± 8.3 | 17.4 ± 8.3# | 72.1 ± 14.5* | 49.0 ± 20.5* | 11.3 ± 4.8* | |
There was no significant difference in the perfusion parameters obtained for hepatocellular carcinoma and metastases at the two field strengths but there was significant difference in perfusion parameters between lesions and surrounding liver parenchyma. Met: Metastatic Adenocarcinoma.
HCC: Hepatocellular carcinoma.
*Represents significant difference (P < 0.05) between surrounding tissue and lesion.
#Represents significant difference (P < 0.05) between the apparently normal liver parenchyma. surrounding the lesions and the liver parenchyma in normal volunteers.
Figure 3Liver perfusion maps for a patient with hepatocellular carcinoma. Free breathing spiral DCE images averaged over 9 frames show the lesion in arterial (a), venous (b) and delayed phases (c). Corresponding liver perfusion maps depict arterial fraction of 77% (d), distribution volume of 45% (e) and mean transit time of 12 seconds (f).
Figure 4Liver perfusion maps for a patient with metastatic carcinoma lung. Axial CT image shows three hypodense lesions (a). Corresponding liver perfusion maps depict arterial fraction (b), distribution volume (c) and mean transit time (d).
Summary of Perfusion parameters in metastases according to the organ of origin.
| Number of lesions | Arterial Fraction (%) | Distribution Volume (%) | Mean Transit Time (seconds) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carcinoma breast | 20 | 77.3 ± 17.0 | 62.5% ± 17.6% | 40.6 ± 27.7 |
| Colorectal cancer | 20 | 64.3 ± 23.8% | 41.4% ± 16.4% | 50.6 ± 25.4 |
| Carcinoma lung | 6 | 81.5 ± 6.8% | 66.4% ± 5.7% | 37.5 ± 17.3 |
There was a statistically significant difference in the distribution volume (DV) for metastatic lesions from breast vs colon (p = 0.0003) and metastatic lesions from colon vs lung (p < 0.0001).