Cargando…

Performance of different Dixon-based methods for MR liver iron assessment in comparison to a biopsy-validated R2* relaxometry method

OBJECTIVES: To prospectively evaluate a 3D-multiecho-Dixon sequence with inline calculation of proton density fat fraction (PDFF) and R2* (qDixon), and an improved version of it (qDixon-WIP), for the MR-quantification of hepatic iron in a clinical setting. METHODS: Patients with increased serum ferr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Henninger, Benjamin, Plaikner, Michaela, Zoller, Heinz, Viveiros, André, Kannengiesser, Stephan, Jaschke, Werner, Kremser, Christian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7979591/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32965571
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07291-w
_version_ 1783667293048274944
author Henninger, Benjamin
Plaikner, Michaela
Zoller, Heinz
Viveiros, André
Kannengiesser, Stephan
Jaschke, Werner
Kremser, Christian
author_facet Henninger, Benjamin
Plaikner, Michaela
Zoller, Heinz
Viveiros, André
Kannengiesser, Stephan
Jaschke, Werner
Kremser, Christian
author_sort Henninger, Benjamin
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To prospectively evaluate a 3D-multiecho-Dixon sequence with inline calculation of proton density fat fraction (PDFF) and R2* (qDixon), and an improved version of it (qDixon-WIP), for the MR-quantification of hepatic iron in a clinical setting. METHODS: Patients with increased serum ferritin underwent 1.5-T MRI of the liver for the evaluation of hepatic iron overload. The imaging protocol for R2* quantification included as follows: (1) a validated, 2D multigradient-echo sequence (initial TE 0.99 ms, R2*-ME-GRE), (2) a 3D-multiecho-Dixon sequence with inline calculation of PDFF and R2* (initial TE 2.38 ms, R2*-qDixon), and optionally (3) a prototype (works-in-progress, WIP) version of the latter (initial TE 1.04 ms, R2*-qDixon-WIP) with improved water/fat separation and noise-corrected parameter fitting. For all sequences, three manually co-registered regions of interest (ROIs) were placed in the liver. R2* values were compared and linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots calculated. RESULTS: Forty-six out of 415 patients showed fat-water (F/W) swap with qDixon and were excluded. A total of 369 patients (mean age 52 years) were included; in 203/369, the optional qDixon-WIP was acquired, which showed no F/W swaps. A strong correlation was found between R2*-ME-GRE and R2*-qDixon (r(2) = 0.92, p < 0.001) with Bland-Altman revealing a mean difference of − 3.82 1/s (SD = 21.26 1/s). Correlation between R2*-GRE-ME and R2*-qDixon-WIP was r(2) = 0.95 (p < 0.001) with Bland-Altman showing a mean difference of − 0.125 1/s (SD = 30.667 1/s). CONCLUSIONS: The 3D-multiecho-Dixon sequence is a reliable tool to quantify hepatic iron. Results are comparable with established relaxometry methods. Improvements to the original implementation eliminate occasional F/W swaps and limitations regarding maximum R2* values. KEY POINTS: • The 3D-multiecho-Dixon sequence for 1.5 T is a reliable tool to quantify hepatic iron. • Results of the 3D-multiecho-Dixon sequence are comparable with established relaxometry methods. • An improved version of the 3D-multiecho-Dixon sequence eliminates minor drawbacks.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7979591
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79795912021-04-05 Performance of different Dixon-based methods for MR liver iron assessment in comparison to a biopsy-validated R2* relaxometry method Henninger, Benjamin Plaikner, Michaela Zoller, Heinz Viveiros, André Kannengiesser, Stephan Jaschke, Werner Kremser, Christian Eur Radiol Magnetic Resonance OBJECTIVES: To prospectively evaluate a 3D-multiecho-Dixon sequence with inline calculation of proton density fat fraction (PDFF) and R2* (qDixon), and an improved version of it (qDixon-WIP), for the MR-quantification of hepatic iron in a clinical setting. METHODS: Patients with increased serum ferritin underwent 1.5-T MRI of the liver for the evaluation of hepatic iron overload. The imaging protocol for R2* quantification included as follows: (1) a validated, 2D multigradient-echo sequence (initial TE 0.99 ms, R2*-ME-GRE), (2) a 3D-multiecho-Dixon sequence with inline calculation of PDFF and R2* (initial TE 2.38 ms, R2*-qDixon), and optionally (3) a prototype (works-in-progress, WIP) version of the latter (initial TE 1.04 ms, R2*-qDixon-WIP) with improved water/fat separation and noise-corrected parameter fitting. For all sequences, three manually co-registered regions of interest (ROIs) were placed in the liver. R2* values were compared and linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots calculated. RESULTS: Forty-six out of 415 patients showed fat-water (F/W) swap with qDixon and were excluded. A total of 369 patients (mean age 52 years) were included; in 203/369, the optional qDixon-WIP was acquired, which showed no F/W swaps. A strong correlation was found between R2*-ME-GRE and R2*-qDixon (r(2) = 0.92, p < 0.001) with Bland-Altman revealing a mean difference of − 3.82 1/s (SD = 21.26 1/s). Correlation between R2*-GRE-ME and R2*-qDixon-WIP was r(2) = 0.95 (p < 0.001) with Bland-Altman showing a mean difference of − 0.125 1/s (SD = 30.667 1/s). CONCLUSIONS: The 3D-multiecho-Dixon sequence is a reliable tool to quantify hepatic iron. Results are comparable with established relaxometry methods. Improvements to the original implementation eliminate occasional F/W swaps and limitations regarding maximum R2* values. KEY POINTS: • The 3D-multiecho-Dixon sequence for 1.5 T is a reliable tool to quantify hepatic iron. • Results of the 3D-multiecho-Dixon sequence are comparable with established relaxometry methods. • An improved version of the 3D-multiecho-Dixon sequence eliminates minor drawbacks. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-09-23 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7979591/ /pubmed/32965571 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07291-w Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Magnetic Resonance
Henninger, Benjamin
Plaikner, Michaela
Zoller, Heinz
Viveiros, André
Kannengiesser, Stephan
Jaschke, Werner
Kremser, Christian
Performance of different Dixon-based methods for MR liver iron assessment in comparison to a biopsy-validated R2* relaxometry method
title Performance of different Dixon-based methods for MR liver iron assessment in comparison to a biopsy-validated R2* relaxometry method
title_full Performance of different Dixon-based methods for MR liver iron assessment in comparison to a biopsy-validated R2* relaxometry method
title_fullStr Performance of different Dixon-based methods for MR liver iron assessment in comparison to a biopsy-validated R2* relaxometry method
title_full_unstemmed Performance of different Dixon-based methods for MR liver iron assessment in comparison to a biopsy-validated R2* relaxometry method
title_short Performance of different Dixon-based methods for MR liver iron assessment in comparison to a biopsy-validated R2* relaxometry method
title_sort performance of different dixon-based methods for mr liver iron assessment in comparison to a biopsy-validated r2* relaxometry method
topic Magnetic Resonance
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7979591/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32965571
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07291-w
work_keys_str_mv AT henningerbenjamin performanceofdifferentdixonbasedmethodsformrliverironassessmentincomparisontoabiopsyvalidatedr2relaxometrymethod
AT plaiknermichaela performanceofdifferentdixonbasedmethodsformrliverironassessmentincomparisontoabiopsyvalidatedr2relaxometrymethod
AT zollerheinz performanceofdifferentdixonbasedmethodsformrliverironassessmentincomparisontoabiopsyvalidatedr2relaxometrymethod
AT viveirosandre performanceofdifferentdixonbasedmethodsformrliverironassessmentincomparisontoabiopsyvalidatedr2relaxometrymethod
AT kannengiesserstephan performanceofdifferentdixonbasedmethodsformrliverironassessmentincomparisontoabiopsyvalidatedr2relaxometrymethod
AT jaschkewerner performanceofdifferentdixonbasedmethodsformrliverironassessmentincomparisontoabiopsyvalidatedr2relaxometrymethod
AT kremserchristian performanceofdifferentdixonbasedmethodsformrliverironassessmentincomparisontoabiopsyvalidatedr2relaxometrymethod