Ahmad A Alhulail1,2, Debra A Patterson1,3, Pingyu Xia1, Xiaopeng Zhou1, Chen Lin3, M Albert Thomas4, Ulrike Dydak1,3, Uzay E Emir1,5. 1. School of Health Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana. 2. Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, Al Kharj, Saudi Arabia. 3. Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana. 4. Department of Radiology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California. 5. Weldon School of Biomedical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To provide a rapid, noninvasive fat-water separation technique that allows producing quantitative maps of particular lipid components. METHODS: The calf muscles in 5 healthy adolescents (age 12-16 years; body mass index = 20 ± 3 kg/m2 ) were scanned by two different fat fraction measurement methods. A density-weighted concentric-ring trajectory metabolite-cycling MRSI technique was implemented to collect data with a nominal resolution of 0.25 mL within 3 minutes and 16 seconds. For comparative purposes, the standard Dixon technique was performed. The two techniques were compared using structural similarity analysis. Additionally, the difference in the distribution of each lipid over the adolescent calf muscles was assessed based on the MRSI data. RESULTS: The proposed MRSI technique provided individual fat fraction maps for eight musculoskeletal lipid components identified by LCModel analysis (IMC/L [CH3 ], EMCL [CH3 ], IMC/L [CH2 ]n , EMC/L [CH2 ]n , IMC/L [CH2 -CH], EMC/L [CH2 -CH], IMC/L [-CH=CH-], and EMC/L [-CH=CH-]) with mean structural similarity indices of 0.19, 0.04, 0.03, 0.50, 0.45, 0.04, 0.07, and 0.12, respectively, compared with the maps generated by the used Dixon method. Further analysis of voxels with zero structural similarity demonstrated an increased sensitivity of fat fraction lipid maps from the data acquired using this MRSI technique over the standard Dixon technique. The lipid spatial distribution over calf muscles was consistent with previously published findings in adults. CONCLUSION: This MRSI technique can be a useful tool when individual lipid fat fraction maps are desired within a clinically acceptable time and with a nominal spatial resolution of 0.25 mL.
PURPOSE: To provide a rapid, noninvasive fat-water separation technique that allows producing quantitative maps of particular lipid components. METHODS: The calf muscles in 5 healthy adolescents (age 12-16 years; body mass index = 20 ± 3 kg/m2 ) were scanned by two different fat fraction measurement methods. A density-weighted concentric-ring trajectory metabolite-cycling MRSI technique was implemented to collect data with a nominal resolution of 0.25 mL within 3 minutes and 16 seconds. For comparative purposes, the standard Dixon technique was performed. The two techniques were compared using structural similarity analysis. Additionally, the difference in the distribution of each lipid over the adolescent calf muscles was assessed based on the MRSI data. RESULTS: The proposed MRSI technique provided individual fat fraction maps for eight musculoskeletal lipid components identified by LCModel analysis (IMC/L [CH3 ], EMCL [CH3 ], IMC/L [CH2 ]n , EMC/L [CH2 ]n , IMC/L [CH2 -CH], EMC/L [CH2 -CH], IMC/L [-CH=CH-], and EMC/L [-CH=CH-]) with mean structural similarity indices of 0.19, 0.04, 0.03, 0.50, 0.45, 0.04, 0.07, and 0.12, respectively, compared with the maps generated by the used Dixon method. Further analysis of voxels with zero structural similarity demonstrated an increased sensitivity of fat fraction lipid maps from the data acquired using this MRSI technique over the standard Dixon technique. The lipid spatial distribution over calf muscles was consistent with previously published findings in adults. CONCLUSION: This MRSI technique can be a useful tool when individual lipidfat fraction maps are desired within a clinically acceptable time and with a nominal spatial resolution of 0.25 mL.
Authors: Wei Shen; Xiangling Mao; Carla Wolper; Stanley Heshka; Stephen Dashnaw; Joy Hirsch; Steven B Heymsfield; Dikoma C Shungu Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: G Perseghin; P Scifo; F De Cobelli; E Pagliato; A Battezzati; C Arcelloni; A Vanzulli; G Testolin; G Pozza; A Del Maschio; L Luzi Journal: Diabetes Date: 1999-08 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Daniella Braz Parente; Rosana Souza Rodrigues; Fernando Fernandes Paiva; Jaime Araújo Oliveira Neto; Lilian Machado-Silva; Valeria Lanzoni; Carlos Frederico Ferreira Campos; Antonio Luis Eiras-Araujo; Pedro Emmanuel Alvarenga Americano do Brasil; Philippe Garteiser; Marilia de Brito Gomes; Renata de Mello Perez Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-11-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ahmad A Alhulail; Mahsa Servati; Nathan Ooms; Oguz Akin; Alp Dincer; M Albert Thomas; Ulrike Dydak; Uzay E Emir Journal: Metabolites Date: 2022-04-23