Cargando…

Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping versus R2*-based Histogram Analysis for Evaluating Liver Fibrosis: Preliminary Results

Purpose: The staging of liver fibrosis is clinically important, and a less invasive method is preferred. Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) has shown a great potential in estimating liver fibrosis in addition to R2* relaxometry. However, few studies have compared QSM analysis and liver fibros...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yoshikawa, Masato, Kudo, Kohsuke, Harada, Taisuke, Harashima, Kazutaka, Suzuki, Jun, Ogawa, Koji, Fujiwara, Taro, Nishida, Mutsumi, Sato, Ryota, Shirai, Toru, Bito, Yoshitaka
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Japanese Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9618931/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34483224
http://dx.doi.org/10.2463/mrms.mp.2020-0175
_version_ 1784821161871278080
author Yoshikawa, Masato
Kudo, Kohsuke
Harada, Taisuke
Harashima, Kazutaka
Suzuki, Jun
Ogawa, Koji
Fujiwara, Taro
Nishida, Mutsumi
Sato, Ryota
Shirai, Toru
Bito, Yoshitaka
author_facet Yoshikawa, Masato
Kudo, Kohsuke
Harada, Taisuke
Harashima, Kazutaka
Suzuki, Jun
Ogawa, Koji
Fujiwara, Taro
Nishida, Mutsumi
Sato, Ryota
Shirai, Toru
Bito, Yoshitaka
author_sort Yoshikawa, Masato
collection PubMed
description Purpose: The staging of liver fibrosis is clinically important, and a less invasive method is preferred. Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) has shown a great potential in estimating liver fibrosis in addition to R2* relaxometry. However, few studies have compared QSM analysis and liver fibrosis. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of estimating liver fibrosis by using QSM and R2*-based histogram analyses by comparing it with ultrasound-based transient elastography and the stage of histologic fibrosis. Methods: Fourteen patients with liver disease were enrolled. Data sets of multi-echo gradient echo sequence with breath-holding were acquired on a 3-Tesla scanner. QSM and R2* were reconstructed by water–fat separation method, and ROIs were analyzed for these images. Quantitative parameters with histogram features (mean, variance, skewness, kurtosis, and 1st, 10th, 50th, 90th, and 99th percentiles) were extracted. These data were compared with the elasticity measured by ultrasound transient elastography and histological stage of liver fibrosis (F0 to F4, based on the new Inuyama classification) determined by biopsy or hepatectomy. The correlation of histogram parameters with intrahepatic elasticity and histologically confirmed fibrosis stage was examined. Texture parameters were compared between subgroups divided according to fibrosis stage. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was also performed. P < 0.05 indicated statistical significance. Results: The six histogram parameters of both QSM and R2*were significantly correlated with intrahepatic elasticity. In particular, three parameters (variance, percentiles [90th and 99th]) of QSM showed high correlation (r = 0.818–0.844), whereas R2* parameters showed a moderate correlation with elasticity. Four parameters of QSM were significantly correlated with fibrosis stage (ρ = 0.637–0.723) and differentiated F2–4 from F0–1 fibrosis and F3–4 from F0–2 fibrosis with areas under the ROC curve of > 0.8, but those of R2* did not. Conclusion: QSM may serve as a promising surrogate indicator in detecting liver fibrosis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9618931
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Japanese Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96189312022-11-14 Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping versus R2*-based Histogram Analysis for Evaluating Liver Fibrosis: Preliminary Results Yoshikawa, Masato Kudo, Kohsuke Harada, Taisuke Harashima, Kazutaka Suzuki, Jun Ogawa, Koji Fujiwara, Taro Nishida, Mutsumi Sato, Ryota Shirai, Toru Bito, Yoshitaka Magn Reson Med Sci Major Paper Purpose: The staging of liver fibrosis is clinically important, and a less invasive method is preferred. Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) has shown a great potential in estimating liver fibrosis in addition to R2* relaxometry. However, few studies have compared QSM analysis and liver fibrosis. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of estimating liver fibrosis by using QSM and R2*-based histogram analyses by comparing it with ultrasound-based transient elastography and the stage of histologic fibrosis. Methods: Fourteen patients with liver disease were enrolled. Data sets of multi-echo gradient echo sequence with breath-holding were acquired on a 3-Tesla scanner. QSM and R2* were reconstructed by water–fat separation method, and ROIs were analyzed for these images. Quantitative parameters with histogram features (mean, variance, skewness, kurtosis, and 1st, 10th, 50th, 90th, and 99th percentiles) were extracted. These data were compared with the elasticity measured by ultrasound transient elastography and histological stage of liver fibrosis (F0 to F4, based on the new Inuyama classification) determined by biopsy or hepatectomy. The correlation of histogram parameters with intrahepatic elasticity and histologically confirmed fibrosis stage was examined. Texture parameters were compared between subgroups divided according to fibrosis stage. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was also performed. P < 0.05 indicated statistical significance. Results: The six histogram parameters of both QSM and R2*were significantly correlated with intrahepatic elasticity. In particular, three parameters (variance, percentiles [90th and 99th]) of QSM showed high correlation (r = 0.818–0.844), whereas R2* parameters showed a moderate correlation with elasticity. Four parameters of QSM were significantly correlated with fibrosis stage (ρ = 0.637–0.723) and differentiated F2–4 from F0–1 fibrosis and F3–4 from F0–2 fibrosis with areas under the ROC curve of > 0.8, but those of R2* did not. Conclusion: QSM may serve as a promising surrogate indicator in detecting liver fibrosis. Japanese Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2021-09-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9618931/ /pubmed/34483224 http://dx.doi.org/10.2463/mrms.mp.2020-0175 Text en ©2021 Japanese Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
spellingShingle Major Paper
Yoshikawa, Masato
Kudo, Kohsuke
Harada, Taisuke
Harashima, Kazutaka
Suzuki, Jun
Ogawa, Koji
Fujiwara, Taro
Nishida, Mutsumi
Sato, Ryota
Shirai, Toru
Bito, Yoshitaka
Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping versus R2*-based Histogram Analysis for Evaluating Liver Fibrosis: Preliminary Results
title Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping versus R2*-based Histogram Analysis for Evaluating Liver Fibrosis: Preliminary Results
title_full Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping versus R2*-based Histogram Analysis for Evaluating Liver Fibrosis: Preliminary Results
title_fullStr Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping versus R2*-based Histogram Analysis for Evaluating Liver Fibrosis: Preliminary Results
title_full_unstemmed Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping versus R2*-based Histogram Analysis for Evaluating Liver Fibrosis: Preliminary Results
title_short Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping versus R2*-based Histogram Analysis for Evaluating Liver Fibrosis: Preliminary Results
title_sort quantitative susceptibility mapping versus r2*-based histogram analysis for evaluating liver fibrosis: preliminary results
topic Major Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9618931/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34483224
http://dx.doi.org/10.2463/mrms.mp.2020-0175
work_keys_str_mv AT yoshikawamasato quantitativesusceptibilitymappingversusr2basedhistogramanalysisforevaluatingliverfibrosispreliminaryresults
AT kudokohsuke quantitativesusceptibilitymappingversusr2basedhistogramanalysisforevaluatingliverfibrosispreliminaryresults
AT haradataisuke quantitativesusceptibilitymappingversusr2basedhistogramanalysisforevaluatingliverfibrosispreliminaryresults
AT harashimakazutaka quantitativesusceptibilitymappingversusr2basedhistogramanalysisforevaluatingliverfibrosispreliminaryresults
AT suzukijun quantitativesusceptibilitymappingversusr2basedhistogramanalysisforevaluatingliverfibrosispreliminaryresults
AT ogawakoji quantitativesusceptibilitymappingversusr2basedhistogramanalysisforevaluatingliverfibrosispreliminaryresults
AT fujiwarataro quantitativesusceptibilitymappingversusr2basedhistogramanalysisforevaluatingliverfibrosispreliminaryresults
AT nishidamutsumi quantitativesusceptibilitymappingversusr2basedhistogramanalysisforevaluatingliverfibrosispreliminaryresults
AT satoryota quantitativesusceptibilitymappingversusr2basedhistogramanalysisforevaluatingliverfibrosispreliminaryresults
AT shiraitoru quantitativesusceptibilitymappingversusr2basedhistogramanalysisforevaluatingliverfibrosispreliminaryresults
AT bitoyoshitaka quantitativesusceptibilitymappingversusr2basedhistogramanalysisforevaluatingliverfibrosispreliminaryresults