Cargando…

Rate of Change of Liver Iron Content by MR Imaging Methods: A Comparison Study

Objective: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can accurately quantify liver iron concentration (LIC), eliminating the need for an invasive liver biopsy. Currently, the most widely used relaxometry methods for iron quantification are R2 and R2*, which are based on T2 and T2* acquisition sequences, resp...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B., Otero, Hansel J., Ghosh, Adarsh, Khrichenko, Dmitry, Serai, Suraj D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9608976/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36287808
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/tomography8050209
_version_ 1784818901470674944
author Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B.
Otero, Hansel J.
Ghosh, Adarsh
Khrichenko, Dmitry
Serai, Suraj D.
author_facet Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B.
Otero, Hansel J.
Ghosh, Adarsh
Khrichenko, Dmitry
Serai, Suraj D.
author_sort Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B.
collection PubMed
description Objective: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can accurately quantify liver iron concentration (LIC), eliminating the need for an invasive liver biopsy. Currently, the most widely used relaxometry methods for iron quantification are R2 and R2*, which are based on T2 and T2* acquisition sequences, respectively. We compared the rate of change of LIC as measured by the R2-based, FDA-approved commercially available third-party software with the rate of change of LIC measured by in-house analysis using R2*-relaxometry-based MR imaging in patients undergoing follow-up MRI scans for liver iron estimation. Methods: We retrospectively included patients who had undergone serial MRIs for liver iron estimation. The MR studies were performed on a 1.5T scanner; standard multi-slice, multi-echo T2- and T2*-based sequences were acquired, and LIC was estimated. The comparison between the rate of change of LIC by R2 and R2* values was performed via correlation coefficients and Bland–Altman difference plots. Results: One hundred and eighty-nine MR abdomen studies for liver iron evaluation from 81 patients (male: 38; female: 43) were included in the study. Fifty-nine patients had two serial scans, eighteen patients had three serial scans, three patients had four serial scans, and one patient had five serial scans. The average time interval between the first and last scans for each patient was 13.3 months. The average rates of change of LIC via R2 and R2* methods were −0.0043 ± 0.0214 and −0.0047 ± 0.012 mg/g per month, respectively. There was no significant difference in the rate of change of LIC observed between the two methods. Linearity between the rate of change of LIC measured by R2 (LIC R2) and R2* (LIC R2*) was strong, showing a correlation coefficient of r = 0.72, p < 0.01. A Bland–Altman plot between the rate of change of the two methods showed that the majority of the plotted variables were between two standard deviations. Conclusion: There was no significant difference in the rate of change of LIC detected between the R2 method and the R2* method that uses a gradient echo (GRE) sequence acquired with breath-hold. Since R2* is relatively faster and less prone to motion artifacts, R2*-derived LIC is recommended for iron homeostasis follow-up in patients with liver iron overload.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9608976
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96089762022-10-28 Rate of Change of Liver Iron Content by MR Imaging Methods: A Comparison Study Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B. Otero, Hansel J. Ghosh, Adarsh Khrichenko, Dmitry Serai, Suraj D. Tomography Article Objective: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can accurately quantify liver iron concentration (LIC), eliminating the need for an invasive liver biopsy. Currently, the most widely used relaxometry methods for iron quantification are R2 and R2*, which are based on T2 and T2* acquisition sequences, respectively. We compared the rate of change of LIC as measured by the R2-based, FDA-approved commercially available third-party software with the rate of change of LIC measured by in-house analysis using R2*-relaxometry-based MR imaging in patients undergoing follow-up MRI scans for liver iron estimation. Methods: We retrospectively included patients who had undergone serial MRIs for liver iron estimation. The MR studies were performed on a 1.5T scanner; standard multi-slice, multi-echo T2- and T2*-based sequences were acquired, and LIC was estimated. The comparison between the rate of change of LIC by R2 and R2* values was performed via correlation coefficients and Bland–Altman difference plots. Results: One hundred and eighty-nine MR abdomen studies for liver iron evaluation from 81 patients (male: 38; female: 43) were included in the study. Fifty-nine patients had two serial scans, eighteen patients had three serial scans, three patients had four serial scans, and one patient had five serial scans. The average time interval between the first and last scans for each patient was 13.3 months. The average rates of change of LIC via R2 and R2* methods were −0.0043 ± 0.0214 and −0.0047 ± 0.012 mg/g per month, respectively. There was no significant difference in the rate of change of LIC observed between the two methods. Linearity between the rate of change of LIC measured by R2 (LIC R2) and R2* (LIC R2*) was strong, showing a correlation coefficient of r = 0.72, p < 0.01. A Bland–Altman plot between the rate of change of the two methods showed that the majority of the plotted variables were between two standard deviations. Conclusion: There was no significant difference in the rate of change of LIC detected between the R2 method and the R2* method that uses a gradient echo (GRE) sequence acquired with breath-hold. Since R2* is relatively faster and less prone to motion artifacts, R2*-derived LIC is recommended for iron homeostasis follow-up in patients with liver iron overload. MDPI 2022-10-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9608976/ /pubmed/36287808 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/tomography8050209 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Venkatakrishna, Shyam Sunder B.
Otero, Hansel J.
Ghosh, Adarsh
Khrichenko, Dmitry
Serai, Suraj D.
Rate of Change of Liver Iron Content by MR Imaging Methods: A Comparison Study
title Rate of Change of Liver Iron Content by MR Imaging Methods: A Comparison Study
title_full Rate of Change of Liver Iron Content by MR Imaging Methods: A Comparison Study
title_fullStr Rate of Change of Liver Iron Content by MR Imaging Methods: A Comparison Study
title_full_unstemmed Rate of Change of Liver Iron Content by MR Imaging Methods: A Comparison Study
title_short Rate of Change of Liver Iron Content by MR Imaging Methods: A Comparison Study
title_sort rate of change of liver iron content by mr imaging methods: a comparison study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9608976/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36287808
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/tomography8050209
work_keys_str_mv AT venkatakrishnashyamsunderb rateofchangeofliverironcontentbymrimagingmethodsacomparisonstudy
AT oterohanselj rateofchangeofliverironcontentbymrimagingmethodsacomparisonstudy
AT ghoshadarsh rateofchangeofliverironcontentbymrimagingmethodsacomparisonstudy
AT khrichenkodmitry rateofchangeofliverironcontentbymrimagingmethodsacomparisonstudy
AT seraisurajd rateofchangeofliverironcontentbymrimagingmethodsacomparisonstudy