Literature DB >> 30980694

Proton density fat fraction MRI of vertebral bone marrow: Accuracy, repeatability, and reproducibility among readers, field strengths, and imaging platforms.

Frederic Carsten Schmeel1, Toni Vomweg2, Frank Träber1, Arnd Gerhards2, Simon Jonas Enkirch1, Anton Faron1, Alois Martin Sprinkart1, Leonard Christopher Schmeel1, Julian Alexander Luetkens1, Daniel Thomas1, Guido Matthias Kukuk1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Chemical shift-encoding based water-fat MRI is an emerging method to noninvasively assess proton density fat fraction (PDFF), a promising quantitative imaging biomarker for estimating tissue fat concentration. However, in vivo validation of PDFF is still lacking for bone marrow applications.
PURPOSE: To determine the accuracy and precision of MRI-determined vertebral bone marrow PDFF among different readers and across different field strengths and imager manufacturers. STUDY TYPE: Repeatability/reproducibility.
SUBJECTS: Twenty-four adult volunteers underwent lumbar spine MRI with one 1.5T and two different 3.0T MR scanners from two vendors on the same day. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 1.5T and 3.0T/3D spoiled-gradient echo multipoint Dixon sequences. ASSESSMENT: Two independent readers measured intravertebral PDFF for the three most central slices of the L1-5 vertebral bodies. Single-voxel MR spectroscopy (MRS)-determined PDFF served as the reference standard for PDFF estimation. STATISTICAL TESTS: Accuracy and bias were assessed by Pearson correlation, linear regression analysis, and Bland-Altman plots. Repeatability and reproducibility were evaluated by Wilcoxon signed rank test, Friedman test, and coefficients of variation. Intraclass correlation coefficients were used to validate intra- and interreader as well as intraimager agreements.
RESULTS: MRI-based PDFF estimates of lumbar bone marrow were highly correlated (r2 = 0.899) and accurate (mean bias, -0.6%) against the MRS-determined PDFF reference standard. PDFF showed high linearity (r2 = 0.972-0.978) and small mean bias (0.6-1.5%) with 95% limits of agreement within ±3.4% across field strengths, imaging platforms, and readers. Repeatability and reproducibility of PDFF were high, with the mean overall coefficient of variation being 0.86% and 2.77%, respectively. The overall intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.986 as a measure for an excellent interreader agreement. DATA
CONCLUSION: MRI-based quantification of vertebral bone marrow PDFF is highly accurate, repeatable, and reproducible among readers, field strengths, and MRI platforms, indicating its robustness as a quantitative imaging biomarker for multicentric studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:1762-1772.
© 2019 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bone marrow; chemical shift imaging; magnetic resonance imaging; magnetic resonance spectroscopy; reproducibility of results

Year:  2019        PMID: 30980694     DOI: 10.1002/jmri.26748

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 1053-1807            Impact factor:   4.813


  8 in total

1.  Adding liver R2* quantification to proton density fat fraction MRI of vertebral bone marrow improves the prediction of osteoporosis.

Authors:  Feng Lu; Yan-Jun Zhao; Jian-Ming Ni; Yu Jiang; Fang-Ming Chen; Zhong-Juan Wang; Zhui-Yang Zhang
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-05-25       Impact factor: 7.034

2.  Repeatability and Image Quality of IDEAL-IQ in Human Lumbar Vertebrae for Fat and Iron Quantification across Acquisition Parameters.

Authors:  Ben Shan; Haiyan Ding; Qianzao Lin; Xiaohua Zuo; Lili Lin; Dongyang Yu; Chunhong Hu
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2022-06-09       Impact factor: 2.809

3.  Measurement of vertebral endplate bone marrow lesion (Modic change) composition with water-fat MRI and relationship to patient-reported outcome measures.

Authors:  Aaron J Fields; Alexander Ballatori; Misung Han; Jeannie F Bailey; Zachary L McCormick; Conor W O'Neill; Sibel Demir-Deviren; Roland Krug; Jeffrey C Lotz
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-02-06       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Linearity and Bias of Proton Density Fat Fraction as a Quantitative Imaging Biomarker: A Multicenter, Multiplatform, Multivendor Phantom Study.

Authors:  Houchun H Hu; Takeshi Yokoo; Mustafa R Bashir; Claude B Sirlin; Diego Hernando; Dariya Malyarenko; Thomas L Chenevert; Mark A Smith; Suraj D Serai; Michael S Middleton; Walter C Henderson; Gavin Hamilton; Jean Shaffer; Yunhong Shu; Jean A Tkach; Andrew T Trout; Nancy Obuchowski; Jean H Brittain; Edward F Jackson; Scott B Reeder
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2021-01-19       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in the Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Vertebral Lesions : Combination of Diffusion-Weighted and Proton Density Fat Fraction Spine MRI.

Authors:  Frederic Carsten Schmeel; Simon Jonas Enkirch; Julian Alexander Luetkens; Anton Faron; Nils Lehnen; Alois Martin Sprinkart; Leonard Christopher Schmeel; Alexander Radbruch; Ulrike Attenberger; Guido Matthias Kukuk; Petra Mürtz
Journal:  Clin Neuroradiol       Date:  2021-03-31       Impact factor: 3.649

6.  Finite Element Analysis of Osteoporotic and Osteoblastic Vertebrae and Its Association With the Proton Density Fat Fraction From Chemical Shift Encoding-Based Water-Fat MRI - A Preliminary Study.

Authors:  Tobias Greve; Nithin Manohar Rayudu; Michael Dieckmeyer; Christof Boehm; Stefan Ruschke; Egon Burian; Christopher Kloth; Jan S Kirschke; Dimitrios C Karampinos; Thomas Baum; Karupppasamy Subburaj; Nico Sollmann
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-07-11       Impact factor: 6.055

Review 7.  MRI Assessment of Bone Marrow Composition in Osteoporosis.

Authors:  Xiaojuan Li; Ann V Schwartz
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 5.163

8.  Proton Density Fat Fraction Spine MRI for Differentiation of Erosive Vertebral Endplate Degeneration and Infectious Spondylitis.

Authors:  Frederic Carsten Schmeel; Asadeh Lakghomi; Nils Christian Lehnen; Robert Haase; Mohammed Banat; Johannes Wach; Nikolaus Handke; Hartmut Vatter; Alexander Radbruch; Ulrike Attenberger; Julian Alexander Luetkens
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-30
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.