| Literature DB >> 30555635 |
Niklas Verloh1, Kirsten Utpatel2, Florian Zeman3, Claudia Fellner1, Hans J Schlitt4, Martina Müller5, Christian Stroszczynski1, Matthias Evert2, Philipp Wiggermann1,6, Michael Haimerl1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of a multiparametric gadolinium ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced MRI examination for the estimation of liver dysfunction classified by the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score.Entities:
Keywords: MELD score; abdomen; liver; magnetic resonance imaging; multiparametric examination
Year: 2018 PMID: 30555635 PMCID: PMC6284745 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.26368
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Patient characteristics
| All ( | NLF ( | ILF ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 60.0 ± 12.9 | 59.8 ± 13.5 | 60.6 ± 11.3 |
| Sex, | |||
| Male | 153 (77) | 107 (75) | 46 (81) |
| Female | 46 (23) | 35 (25) | 11 (19) |
| Weight (kg) | 83.1 ± 16.2 | 84.9 ± 17.7 | 83.5 ± 12.1 |
| Height (m) | 1.7 ± 0.1 | 1.7 ± 0.1 | 1.8 ± 0.1 |
| MELD score (range) | 9.8 ± 4.0 (6–30) | 7.7 8 ± 1.3 (6–10) | 14.9 ± 3.7 (11–30) |
Table 1 shows the patient characteristics for the subgroups.
Data presented as the means ± standard deviation.
NLF: Normal liver function.
ILF: Impaired liver function.
Logistic regression
| Independent variable | NLF ( | ILF ( | OR (95%-CI) | AUC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 mapping 3D | |||||
| T1 plain [ms] | 770.9 ± 130.1 | 758.1 ± 143.6 | 0.99 (0.97, 1.02)** | 0.584 | 0.544 |
| | |||||
| | |||||
| T1 3D VIBE | |||||
| | |||||
| Opposed-phase plain [a.u.] | 237.4 ± 37.6 | 222.1 ± 37.9 | 1.02 (0.97, 1.06)** | 0.574 | 0.517 |
| fs plain [a.u.] | 187.6 ± 32.9 | 187.5 ± 30.6 | 1.00 (0.91, 1.10)** | 0.513 | 0.987 |
| | |||||
| | |||||
| T2 BLADE fs | 160.9 ± 55.5 | 168.3 ± 52.1 | 1.02 (0.97, 1.08)** | 0.547 | 0.390 |
| ADC (mm2/s) | 1.164 × 10−3 ± 0.297 × 10−3 | 1.215 × 10−3 ± 0.209 × 10−3 | 1.07 (0.96, 1.21) | 0.545 | 0.232 |
Table 2 shows the results of the logistic regression analyses with the MELD score as a dependent variable.
NLF: Normal liver function; ILF: Impaired liver function.
OR: Odds ratio; CI: Confidence interval; AUC: Area under the curve, p: Level of significance.
*per 0.1, **per 10 units.
Multiple logistic regression
| Independent variable | OR (95%-CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| T1 mapping 3D HBP | 1.03 (0.98, 1.08)** | 0.307 |
| T1 3D VIBE in plain | 0.92 (0.80, 1.05)** | 0.219 |
| T1 3D VIBE fs HBP | 1.03 (0.93, 1.15)** | 0.555 |
| RE T1 3D VIBE (fs plain and HBP) | 0.92 (0.73, 1.15)* | 0.446 |
| T2 HASTE | 0.96 (0.90, 1.02)** | 0.214 |
Table 3 shows the results of the multiple logistic regression analysis with the MELD score as a dependent variable.
OR: Odds ratio; CI: Confidence interval; p: Level of significance.
*per 0.1, **per 10 units.
Figure 1Scatterplot of the reduction rate between plain and contrast enhanced of T1 mapping sequences in correlation to the MELD score
The solid line indicates the cut off between normal (NLF) and impaired liver function (ILF).