1
|
Imajo K, Saigusa Y, Kobayashi T, Nagai K, Nishida S, Kawamura N, Doi H, Iwaki M, Nogami A, Honda Y, Kessoku T, Ogawa Y, Kirikoshi H, Kokubu S, Utsunomiya D, Takahashi H, Aishima S, Sumida Y, Saito S, Yoneda M, Dennis A, Kin S, Andersson A, Nakajima A. Head-to-head comparison among FAST, MAST, and multiparametric MRI-based new score in diagnosing at-risk MASH. Eur Radiol 2025; 35:3599-3609. [PMID: 39638942 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-024-11215-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2024] [Revised: 08/14/2024] [Accepted: 10/13/2024] [Indexed: 12/07/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES New scores were developed to identify at-risk metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) using multiparametric MRI (mpMRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS A prospective study was conducted on 176 patients with suspected or diagnosed metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) paired with an MR scan, vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE), and liver biopsy. Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) using magnetic resonance elastography (MRE), proton density fat fraction (PDFF), and mpMRI-based corrected T1 (cT1) were combined to develop a one-step strategy, named MPcT (MRE + PDFF + cT1, combined score), and a two-step strategy-MRE-based LSM followed by PDFF with cT1 (M-PcT, paired score) for diagnosing at-risk MASH. Each model was categorized using rule-in and rule-out criteria (three categorized analyses). To avoid overfitting, the diagnostic accuracies were evaluated based on 5-fold cross-validation. RESULTS PDFF + cT1 (PcT) had the highest diagnostic performance for severe activity (hepatic inflammation plus ballooning grade ≥ 3) and for NAS ≥ 4 (active MASH). Areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) of M-PcT (0.832) for detecting at-risk MASH were significantly higher than those of Fibroscan-AST (FAST) (0.744, p = 0.017), MRI-AST (MAST) (0.710, p = 0.002), and MPcT (0.695, p < 0.001) in three categorized analysis. Following the rule-in criteria, positive predictive values of M-PcT (84.5%) were higher than those of FAST (73.5%), MAST (70.0%), and MPcT (66.7%). Following the rule-out criteria, negative predictive values of M-PcT (88.7%) were higher than those of FAST (84.0%), MAST (73.9%), and MPcT (84.9%). CONCLUSIONS The two-step strategy, M-PcT (paired score), showed the reliability of rule-in/-out for at-risk MASH, with better predictive performance compared with FAST and MAST (combined score). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (number, UMIN000012757). KEY POINTS Question There is no mpMRI-based method for detecting as-risk MASH (NAFLD activity score ≥ 4 with fibrosis stage ≥ 2) like FAST and MAST scores. Findings MRE-based LSMs followed by PDFF with cT1 (M-PcT) were more useful in detecting at-risk MASH than the combined score (FAST and MAST). Clinical relevance By combining MRE and PDFF with cT1, it becomes possible to evaluate the pathology of MASH without the need for a liver biopsy, assisting in prognosis prediction and decision-making for treatment options.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kento Imajo
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Shin-yurigaoka General Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan
- Minimally Invasive Surgical and Medical Oncology, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan
| | - Yusuke Saigusa
- Department of Biostatistics, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Kanazawa-ku, Japan
| | - Takashi Kobayashi
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Koki Nagai
- Department of Gastroenterology, Shin-yurigaoka General Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan
| | - Shinya Nishida
- Department of Gastroenterology, Shin-yurigaoka General Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan
| | - Nobuyoshi Kawamura
- Department of Gastroenterology, Shin-yurigaoka General Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan
| | - Hiroyoshi Doi
- Department of Gastroenterology, Shin-yurigaoka General Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan
| | - Michihiro Iwaki
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Asako Nogami
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Yasushi Honda
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Takaomi Kessoku
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
- Department of Palliative Medicine and Gastroenterology, International University Health and Welfare Narita Hospital, Narita, Japan
| | - Yuji Ogawa
- Department of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Yokohama Medical Center, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Hiroyuki Kirikoshi
- Department of Clinical Laboratory, Yokohama City University Hospital, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Shigehiro Kokubu
- Department of Gastroenterology, Shin-yurigaoka General Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan
| | - Daisuke Utsunomiya
- Department of Radiology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Hirokazu Takahashi
- Division of Metabolism and Endocrinology, Faculty of Medicine, Saga University, Saga, Japan
| | - Shinichi Aishima
- Department of Pathology & Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Saga University, Saga, Japan
| | - Yoshio Sumida
- Graduate School of Healthcare Management, International University of Healthcare and Welfare, Minato-ku, Japan
| | - Satoru Saito
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Masato Yoneda
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | | | | | | | - Atsushi Nakajima
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kierońska-Siwak S, Filipiak P, Jabłońska M, Sokal P. A comparison of diffusion tensor imaging tractography approaches to identify the Frontal Aslant Tract in neurosurgical patients. Front Neurosci 2025; 19:1543032. [PMID: 40356699 PMCID: PMC12066519 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2025.1543032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2024] [Accepted: 03/20/2025] [Indexed: 05/15/2025] Open
Abstract
Introduction This study aims to present various tractography methods for delineating the Frontal Aslant Tract (FAT) and to quantify morphological features of FAT based on diffusion tensor imaging. Methods The study includes 68 patients, for which FAT was reconstructed using the Region Of Interest (ROI)-based approach. The ROIs were defined in either SFG - Superior Frontal Gyrus (ROI 1), or SMA-Supplementary Motor Area (ROI 2). The respective endpoints were located in the Inferior Frontal Gyrus (IFG)-either in pars opercularis or in pars triangularis. For each patient, FAT was delineated using four combinations of the above ROI-endpoint pairs. Results The highest streamline counts and fiber volumes of FAT were obtained using ROI 1 (i.e., SFG) with the endpoint in IFG pars opercularis. All subjects expressed left dominance of the pathway quantified by the higher streamline counts and fiber volumes regardless of gender. Additionally, higher Mean Diffusivity (MD) and lower Fractional Anisotropy (FA) values were observed in patients above 55 years of age than in younger patients. Discussion FAT is a neural pathway that can be tracked based on various anatomical landmarks. Clinically, it appears that delineating FAT between SFG and the pars opercularis region of IFG is optimal, as it is directly associated with the highest number of fibers and the greatest volume of the tract contained between these points.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Kierońska-Siwak
- Department of Neurosurgery, Functional and Stereotactic Neurosurgery, Collegium Medicum, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Bydgoszcz, Poland
- Department of Neurosurgery and Neurology, Jan Biziel University Hospital No 2, Collegium Medicum, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Bydgoszcz, Poland
| | - Patryk Filipiak
- Center for Advanced Imaging Innovation and Research (CAIR), NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States
| | - Magdalena Jabłońska
- Department of Neurosurgery, Functional and Stereotactic Neurosurgery, Collegium Medicum, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Bydgoszcz, Poland
- Doctoral School of Medical and Health Sciences, Collegium Medicum, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Bydgoszcz, Poland
| | - Paweł Sokal
- Department of Neurosurgery, Functional and Stereotactic Neurosurgery, Collegium Medicum, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Bydgoszcz, Poland
- Department of Neurosurgery and Neurology, Jan Biziel University Hospital No 2, Collegium Medicum, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Bydgoszcz, Poland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ferraioli G, Roccarina D, Barr RG. Attenuation Coefficient for Hepatic Steatosis Using a Single Ultrasound System: Associations of Measurement Parameters With Interoperator Agreement and Diagnostic Performance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2025. [PMID: 40237427 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.25.32746] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/18/2025]
Abstract
Background: Clinical adoption of ultrasound attenuation coefficient (AC) measurements has been hindered by lack of uniform measurement protocol and a range of factors that may cause variability. Objective: To evaluate associations of ROI depth, ROI size, and confidence map threshold with interobserver agreement and diagnostic performance of ultrasound AC measurements in detecting and grading hepatic steatosis using MRI proton-density fat fraction (PDFF) as the reference standard. Methods: This prospective study enrolled adults with known steatosis or at risk for steatosis from October 2023 to August 2024. One of two operators obtained videos of AC acquisitions using a single ultrasound unit. Both operators independently reviewed all videos and placed circular ROIs to obtain AC measurements for all 24 possible combinations of four ROI depths (2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and 4.0 cm from liver capsule to ROI outer edge), three ROI sizes (3.0, 3.5, and 4.0 cm), and two confidence map thresholds (20% and 40%). Participants underwent MRI PDFF measurement as reference. Results: The analysis included 101 participants (mean age, 54.5±12.1 years; 62 female, 39 male). Interoperator agreement was excellent for all combinations (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.92-0.98). AC measurements showed strongest correlations (Spearman rho, 0.81 and 0.80 for operators 1 and 2, respectively) with MRI PDFF at a ROI depth of 4.0 cm. The optimal combination considering correlations with MRI PDFF and AUC across steatosis grades included a depth of 4.0 cm, size of 4.0 cm, and threshold of 40%. This combination had AUC for detecting steatosis with grade >0, >1, and >2 for operator 1 of 0.93, 0.88, and 0.81, respectively, and operator 2 of 0.92, 0.86, and 0.81, respectively. However, accuracy for detecting steatosis (grade >0) was highest for the combination of depth of 3.0 cm, size of 4.0 cm, and threshold of 40% (operator 1, 90.1%; operator 2, 82.2%). Conclusion: AC measurements showed excellent interoperator agreement across parameter combinations. Correlations with MRI PDFF were strongest at a depth of 4.0 cm. Combinations yielding highest diagnostic performance were identified. Clinical Impact: These results will help determine a standardized optimal protocol for ultrasound AC measurements, facilitating clinical adoption for liver fat quantification.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giovanna Ferraioli
- Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Campus della Salute, presso Policlinico San Matteo, Viale Golgi 19, Pavia, 27100 Italy
| | - Davide Roccarina
- SOD Medicina Interna ed Epatologia, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi, Largo Brambilla 3, Firenze, 50134 Italy
- Sheila Sherlock Liver Unit and UCL Institute for Liver and Digestive Health, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
| | - Richard G Barr
- Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio, USA
- Southwoods Imaging, 7623 Market Street Youngstown, Ohio, 44512 USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Allen TJ, van der Heijden RA, Simchick G, Hernando D. Reproducibility of liver ADC measurements using first moment optimized diffusion imaging. Magn Reson Med 2025; 93:1568-1584. [PMID: 39529300 PMCID: PMC11782722 DOI: 10.1002/mrm.30372] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2024] [Revised: 09/23/2024] [Accepted: 10/22/2024] [Indexed: 11/16/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Cardiac-induced liver motion can bias liver ADC measurements and compromise reproducibility. The purpose of this work was to enable motion-robust DWI on multiple MR scanners and assess reproducibility of the resulting liver ADC measurements. METHODS First moment-optimized diffusion imaging (MODI) was implemented on three MR scanners with various gradient performances and field strengths. MODI-DWI and conventional Stejskal-Tanner monopolar (MONO) DWI were acquired in eight (N = 8) healthy volunteers on each scanner, and DWI repetitions were combined using three different averaging methods. For each combination of scanner, acquisition, and averaging method, ADC measurements from each liver segment were collected. Systematic differences in ADC values between scanners and methods were assessed with linear mixed effects modeling, and reproducibility was quantified via reproducibility coefficients. RESULTS MODI reduced left-right liver lobe ADC bias from 0.43 × 10-3 mm2/s (MONO) to 0.19 × 10-3 mm2/s (MODI) when simple (unweighted) repetition averaging was used. The bias was reduced from 0.23 × 10-3 mm2/s to 0.06 × 10-3 mm2/s using weighted averaging, and 0.14 × 10-3 mm2/s to 0.01 × 10-3 mm2/s using squared weighted averaging. There was no significant difference in ADC measurements between field strengths or scanner gradient performance. MODI improved reproducibility coefficients compared to MONO: 0.84 × 10-3 mm2/s vs. 0.63 × 10-3 mm2/s (MODI vs. MONO) for simple averaging, 0.66 × 10-3 mm2/s vs. 0.50 × 10-3 mm2/s for weighted averaging, and 0.61 × 10-3 mm2/s vs. 0.47 × 10-3 mm2/s for squared weighted averaging. CONCLUSION The feasibility of motion-robust liver DWI using MODI was demonstrated on multiple MR scanners. MODI improved interlobar agreement and reproducibility of ADC measurements in a healthy cohort.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy J. Allen
- Department of Medical PhysicsUniversity of Wisconsin‐Madison
MadisonWisconsinUSA
| | - Rianne A. van der Heijden
- Department of RadiologyUniversity of Wisconsin‐MadisonMadisonWisconsinUSA
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear MedicineErasmus University Medical CenterRotterdamThe Netherlands
| | - Gregory Simchick
- Department of RadiologyUniversity of Wisconsin‐MadisonMadisonWisconsinUSA
| | - Diego Hernando
- Department of Medical PhysicsUniversity of Wisconsin‐Madison
MadisonWisconsinUSA
- Department of RadiologyUniversity of Wisconsin‐MadisonMadisonWisconsinUSA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Askeland A, Rasmussen RW, Gjela M, Frøkjær JB, Højlund K, Mellergaard M, Handberg A. Non-invasive liver fibrosis markers are increased in obese individuals with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and the metabolic syndrome. Sci Rep 2025; 15:10652. [PMID: 40148373 PMCID: PMC11950363 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-85508-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2024] [Accepted: 01/03/2025] [Indexed: 03/29/2025] Open
Abstract
The need for early non-invasive diagnostic tools for chronic liver fibrosis is growing, particularly in individuals with obesity, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), and the metabolic syndrome (MetS) since prevalence of these conditions is increasing. This case-control study compared non-invasive liver fibrosis markers in obesity with NAFLD and MetS (NAFLD-MetS, n = 33), in obese (n = 28) and lean (n = 27) control groups. We used MRI (T1 relaxation times (T1) and liver stiffness), circulating biomarkers (CK18, PIIINP, and TIMP1), and algorithms (FIB-4 index, Forns score, FNI, and MACK3 score) to assess their potential in predicting liver fibrosis risk. We found that T1 (892 ± 81 ms vs. 818 ± 64 ms, p < 0.001), FNI (15 ± 12% vs. 9 ± 7%, p = 0.018), CK18 (166 ± 110 U/L vs. 113 ± 41 U/L, p = 0.019), and MACK3 (0.18 ± 0.15 vs. 0.05 ± 0.04, p < 0.001) were higher in the NAFLD-MetS group compared with the obese control group. Moreover, correlations were found between CK18 and FNI (r = 0.69, p < 0.001), CK18 and T1 (r = 0.41, p < 0.001), FNI and T1 (r = 0.33, p = 0.006), MACK3 and FNI (r = 0.79, p < 0.001), and MACK3 and T1 (r = 0.50, p < 0.001). We show that liver fibrosis markers are increased in obese individuals with NAFLD and MetS without clinical signs of liver fibrosis. More studies are needed to validate the use of these non-invasive biomarkers for early identification of liver fibrosis risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anders Askeland
- Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
| | | | - Mimoza Gjela
- Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
- Department of Radiology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - Jens Brøndum Frøkjær
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
- Department of Radiology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - Kurt Højlund
- Steno Diabetes Center Odense, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Maiken Mellergaard
- Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - Aase Handberg
- Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Tada T, Kumada T, Gotoh T, Niwa F, Ogawa S, Yasuda S, Koshiyama Y, Akita T, Tanaka J, Kodama Y, Toyoda H. Validation of a B-mode ultrasonography scoring system for assessing liver steatosis: A comparison with MRI-Derived proton density fat fraction. Hepatol Res 2025. [PMID: 40318112 DOI: 10.1111/hepr.14190] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/05/2025] [Revised: 03/10/2025] [Accepted: 03/18/2025] [Indexed: 05/07/2025]
Abstract
AIM Noninvasive detection of liver steatosis and monitoring its progression are essential for effective therapeutic management. We validated the diagnostic performance of an ultrasonography (US)-based steatotic liver scoring system, derived from the B-mode method and the hepatic steatosis index (HSI) for the detection of liver steatosis, as identified by proton density fat fraction (PDFF) measurements on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS A total of 916 patients with chronic liver disease were included in the analysis. RESULTS The median MRI-PDFF value was 4.0% (interquartile range: 2.0-9.7). The distribution of scores (0/1/2/3/4/5/6) according to the US-based steatotic liver scoring system was as follows: 475, 36, 99, 78, 141, 66, and 21, respectively. The median HSI was 32.8 (28.9-37.4). A significant positive association between advancing scores of the US-based steatotic liver scoring system and increasing MRI-PDFF values was observed (p < 0.001). The diagnostic performance of the US-based steatotic liver scoring system and HSI for detecting steatosis grades ≥1, ≥2, and 3, as determined by MRI-PDFF, showed areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.940 and 0.842 (p < 0.001), 0.949 and 0.847 (p < 0.001), and 0.945 and 0.864 (p < 0.001), respectively. When the cutoff values of the scoring system were set at 2, 3, and 4 for steatosis grades ≥1, ≥2, and 3, the sensitivity and specificity were 90.6% and 90.5%, 92.9% and 83.0%, and 93.3% and 84.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION The B-mode US-based steatotic liver scoring system demonstrated robust diagnostic capability in detecting liver steatosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Toshifumi Tada
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan
| | - Takashi Kumada
- Gifu Kyoritsu University, Ogaki, Japan
- Institute of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan
| | - Tatsuya Gotoh
- Department of Imaging Diagnosis, Ogaki Municipal Hospital, Ogaki, Japan
| | - Fumihiko Niwa
- Department of Imaging Diagnosis, Ogaki Municipal Hospital, Ogaki, Japan
| | - Sadanobu Ogawa
- Department of Imaging Diagnosis, Ogaki Municipal Hospital, Ogaki, Japan
| | - Satoshi Yasuda
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Ogaki Municipal Hospital, Ogaki, Japan
| | - Yuichi Koshiyama
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Ogaki Municipal Hospital, Ogaki, Japan
| | - Tomoyuki Akita
- Institute of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan
| | - Junko Tanaka
- Institute of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan
| | - Yuzo Kodama
- Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan
| | - Hidenori Toyoda
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Ogaki Municipal Hospital, Ogaki, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Panagiotopoulos N, Wolfson T, Harris DT, Batakis D, Agni R, Ceriani L, Covarrubias Y, Hamilton G, Middleton MS, Martins VF, Gamst AC, Oechtering TH, Sappenfield R, Horgan S, Grunvald E, Funk LM, Jacobsen GR, Lidor AO, Goodman JA, Khoury SB, Sirlin CB, Reeder SB. Proton density fat fraction for diagnosis of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease. Hepatology 2025:01515467-990000000-01216. [PMID: 40132140 DOI: 10.1097/hep.0000000000001318] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2024] [Accepted: 02/10/2025] [Indexed: 03/27/2025]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Prior work has shown that MRI-derived proton density fat fraction (PDFF) can diagnose metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) noninvasively, but there is a paucity of data on the performance of PDFF to classify more advanced forms of the MASLD spectrum. The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of PDFF for the diagnoses of MASLD, metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH), and fibrotic MASH in adults with obesity undergoing bariatric surgery, using contemporaneous intraoperative liver biopsy as a reference. APPROACH AND RESULTS PDFF was evaluated alone and with other potential classifiers (imaging, serum and anthropometric), using Bayesian Information Criterion-based stepwise logistic regression models. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUC) were computed for all models and single classifiers. Cross-validated sensitivity and specificity were calculated at Youden-based PDFF classification thresholds. Data analysis from 140 patients demonstrated that PDFF was the most accurate single classifier, with high AUC for MASLD (0.95), MASH (0.85), and fibrotic MASH (0.82) (all p <0.001). Multivariable models, including PDFF, outperformed those without PDFF. The Youden-based threshold for PDFF was 4.4% for MASLD (sensitivity: 87%, specificity: 86%), 6.9% for MASH (sensitivity: 77%, specificity: 66%), and 13.5% for fibrotic MASH (sensitivity: 67%, specificity: 85%). CONCLUSIONS PDFF was the most accurate single classifier for diagnosing MASLD, MASH, and fibrotic MASH. The most accurate multivariable classification models for MASLD, MASH, and fibrotic MASH included PDFF, demonstrating the central importance of PDFF for noninvasive assessment of the MASLD spectrum.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Tanya Wolfson
- Computational and Applied Statistical Laboratory (CASL), San Diego Supercomputer Center, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - David T Harris
- Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Danielle Batakis
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Rashmi Agni
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Lael Ceriani
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Yesenia Covarrubias
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Gavin Hamilton
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Michael S Middleton
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Vitor F Martins
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Anthony C Gamst
- Computational and Applied Statistical Laboratory (CASL), San Diego Supercomputer Center, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
- Department of Mathematics, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Thekla H Oechtering
- Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Ryan Sappenfield
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Santiago Horgan
- Department of Surgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Eduardo Grunvald
- Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Luke M Funk
- Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Department of Surgery. William S. Middleton VA, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Garth R Jacobsen
- Department of Surgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Anne O Lidor
- Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - James A Goodman
- Translational Clinical Sciences, Pfizer Research & Development, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Sami B Khoury
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Claude B Sirlin
- Department of Radiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Scott B Reeder
- Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Tipirneni-Sajja A, Shrestha U, Esparza J, Morin CE, Kannengiesser S, Roberts NT, Peeters JM, Sharma SD, Hu HH. State-of-the-Art Quantification of Liver Iron With MRI-Vendor Implementation and Available Tools. J Magn Reson Imaging 2025; 61:1110-1132. [PMID: 39133767 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.29526] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2024] [Revised: 06/19/2024] [Accepted: 06/20/2024] [Indexed: 01/06/2025] Open
Abstract
The role of MRI to estimate liver iron concentration (LIC) for identifying patients with iron overload and guiding the titration of chelation therapy is increasingly established for routine clinical practice. However, the existence of multiple MRI-based LIC quantification techniques limits standardization and widespread clinical adoption. In this article, we review the existing and widely accepted MRI-based LIC estimation methods at 1.5 T and 3 T: signal intensity ratio (SIR) and relaxometry (R2 and R2*) and discuss the basic principles, acquisition and analysis protocols, and MRI-LIC calibrations for each technique. Further, we provide an up-to-date information on MRI vendor implementations and available offline commercial and free software for each MRI-based LIC quantification approach. We also briefly review the emerging and advanced MRI techniques for LIC estimation and their current limitations for clinical use. Lastly, we discuss the implications of MRI-based LIC measurements on clinical use and decision-making in the management of patients with iron overload. Some of the key highlights from this review are as follows: 1) Both R2 and R2* can estimate accurate and reproducible LIC, when validated acquisition parameters and analysis protocols are applied, 2) Although the Ferriscan R2 method has been widely used, recent consensus and guidelines endorse R2*-MRI as the most accurate and reproducible method for LIC estimation, 3) Ongoing efforts aim to establish R2*-MRI as the standard approach for quantifying LIC, and 4) Emerging R2*-MRI techniques employ radial sampling strategies and offer improved motion compensation and broader dynamic range for LIC estimation. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aaryani Tipirneni-Sajja
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
- Diagnostic Imaging, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Utsav Shrestha
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
- Diagnostic Imaging, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Juan Esparza
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Cara E Morin
- Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
- Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
| | | | - Nathan T Roberts
- MR Clinical Solutions & Research Collaborations, GE HealthCare, Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
| | | | - Samir D Sharma
- Canon Medical Research USA, Inc., Mayfield Village, Ohio, USA
| | - Houchun H Hu
- Radiology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Chang YC, Yen KC, Liang PC, Ho MC, Ho CM, Hsiao CY, Hsiao CH, Lu CH, Wu CH. Automated liver volumetry and hepatic steatosis quantification with magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction. J Formos Med Assoc 2025; 124:264-270. [PMID: 38643056 DOI: 10.1016/j.jfma.2024.04.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2023] [Revised: 04/04/2024] [Accepted: 04/16/2024] [Indexed: 04/22/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Preoperative imaging evaluation of liver volume and hepatic steatosis for the donor affects transplantation outcomes. However, computed tomography (CT) for liver volumetry and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) for hepatic steatosis are time consuming. Therefore, we investigated the correlation of automated 3D-multi-echo-Dixon sequence magnetic resonance imaging (ME-Dixon MRI) and its derived proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) with CT liver volumetry and MRS hepatic steatosis measurements in living liver donors. METHODS This retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted from December 2017 to November 2022. We enrolled donors who received a dynamic CT scan and an MRI exam within 2 days. First, the CT volumetry was processed semiautomatically using commercial software, and ME-Dixon MRI volumetry was automatically measured using an embedded sequence. Next, the signal intensity of MRI-PDFF volumetric data was correlated with MRS as the gold standard. RESULTS We included the 165 living donors. The total liver volume of ME-Dixon MRI was significantly correlated with CT (r = 0.913, p < 0.001). The fat percentage measured using MRI-PDFF revealed a strong correlation between automatic segmental volume and MRS (r = 0.705, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the hepatic steatosis group (MRS ≥5%) had a strong correlation than the non-hepatic steatosis group (MRS <5%) in both volumetric (r = 0.906 vs. r = 0.887) and fat fraction analysis (r = 0.779 vs. r = 0.338). CONCLUSION Automated ME-Dixon MRI liver volumetry and MRI-PDFF were strongly correlated with CT liver volumetry and MRS hepatic steatosis measurements, especially in donors with hepatic steatosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yuan-Chen Chang
- Department of Medical Imaging and Radiology, National Taiwan University Hospital and College of Medicine, Taiwan
| | - Kuang-Chen Yen
- Department of Medical Imaging and Radiology, National Taiwan University Hospital and College of Medicine, Taiwan
| | - Po-Chin Liang
- Department of Medical Imaging and Radiology, National Taiwan University Hospital and College of Medicine, Taiwan
| | - Ming-Chih Ho
- Departments of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital and College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan; Center for Functional Image and Interventional Image, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan; Department of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch, Hsin-Chu, Taiwan
| | - Cheng-Maw Ho
- Departments of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital and College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Chih-Yang Hsiao
- Departments of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital and College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Chiu-Han Hsiao
- Research Center for Information Technology Innovation, Academia Sinica, Taiwan
| | - Chia-Hsun Lu
- Department of Radiology, Wan-Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Chih-Horng Wu
- Department of Medical Imaging and Radiology, National Taiwan University Hospital and College of Medicine, Taiwan; Hepatits Research Center, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan; Center of Minimal-Invasive Interventional Radiology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Chen G, Tang H, Yang Y, Zhou L, Wang Q, Hu D, Li Z. Optimization of regions of interest sampling strategies for proton density fat-fraction MRI of hepatic steatosis before liver transplantation in ex vivo livers. Heliyon 2025; 11:e40146. [PMID: 40028590 PMCID: PMC11872435 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e40146] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2023] [Revised: 02/15/2024] [Accepted: 11/04/2024] [Indexed: 03/05/2025] Open
Abstract
Objectives The quantity of regions of interest (ROIs) constitutes the primary determinant of the time investment in image analysis. In the context of proton density fat-fraction (PDFF) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) conducted on liver grafts in ex vivo conditions, this research systematically examines various ROI sampling strategies. The findings of this study furnish essential insights, offering a foundation for optimizing time efficiency while ensuring precise assessment of hepatic steatosis before the crucial process of liver transplantation. Methods This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective study and included 35 liver grafts with histopathological steatosis that underwent 3T PDFF MRI in ex vivo. One ROI of 1 cm2 was selected for each hepatic segment, and any combination of ROIs in 1-8 liver segments was used, resulting in 511 combinations. Using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman analyses, the PDFFs of all these combinations were compared with the 9-ROI average PDFF. There was a moderate correlation between the average PDFF and the histological findings (R = 0.47, P<0.01). Results The average 9-ROI PDFF of all liver grafts was 4.07 ± 4.35 % (0.870-20.904). All strategies with ≥5 ROIs had intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) ≥ 0.995 and absolute limits of agreement (|LOA|)≤ 1.5 %. Overall, 54 of 84 (67.5 %) 3-ROI sampling strategy had ICC ≥0.995, and 70 of 84 (70 %) had |LOA|≤ 1.5 %. A total of 111 of 126 (88.1 %) 4-ROI sampling strategy had ICC ≥0.995, and 125 of 126 (99.2 %) had |LOA| ≤ 1.5 %. Conclusions The employment of the 5-ROI sampling strategy proves instrumental in both time conservation and precise assessment of hepatic steatosis within liver grafts during the ex vivo phase preceding liver transplantation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gen Chen
- Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 1095 Jiefang Avenue, Qiaokou District, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China
| | - Hao Tang
- Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 1095 Jiefang Avenue, Qiaokou District, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China
| | - Yang Yang
- Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 1095 Jiefang Avenue, Qiaokou District, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China
| | - Lifen Zhou
- Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 1095 Jiefang Avenue, Qiaokou District, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China
| | - Qiuxia Wang
- Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 1095 Jiefang Avenue, Qiaokou District, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China
| | - Daoyu Hu
- Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 1095 Jiefang Avenue, Qiaokou District, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China
| | - Zhen Li
- Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 1095 Jiefang Avenue, Qiaokou District, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Chiyanika C, Shumbayawonda E, Pansini M, Liu KH, Yip TC, Wong VW, Chu WCW. Gamma-glutamyl transferase: A potential biomarker for pancreas steatosis in patients with concurrent obesity, insulin resistance and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease. Clin Obes 2025; 15:e12712. [PMID: 39436014 PMCID: PMC11706757 DOI: 10.1111/cob.12712] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2023] [Revised: 08/30/2024] [Accepted: 10/03/2024] [Indexed: 10/23/2024]
Abstract
To evaluate the relationship between serum gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) levels and fatty pancreas in subjects with concurrent obesity, insulin resistance and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) without a history of pancreatitis. From March 2019 to September 2021, 31 adult subjects with concurrent obesity and MASLD were recruited as part of the study investigating the biological impact of bariatric surgery and lifestyle modification on obesity. Chemical shift encoded MRI of the abdomen, LiverMultiScan, anthropometric, clinical and blood biochemistry analyses were performed prior to any intervention at baseline. GGT (p <.001) was significantly different between those 'with fatty pancreas' and 'without fatty pancreas' groups. GGT (p <.001) was significantly different between those 'with both metabolic syndrome and fatty pancreas' and those 'with metabolic syndrome but without fatty pancreas.' GGT (p <.001) was also significantly different between those 'with both diabetes and fatty pancreas' and those 'with diabetes but without fatty pancreas'. Logistic regression analysis showed that abnormal GGT levels (p = .010) and Hypertension (p = .045) were significant independent predictors of fatty pancreas. GGT was associated with fatty pancreas by an odds ratio 7.333 (95% [CI]: 1.467-36.664), while the AUROC of GGT in determining fatty pancreas was 0.849. Elevation in serum GGT might be a potential marker to identify fatty pancreas.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chileka Chiyanika
- Department of Health Technology and InformaticsThe Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityHong KongChina
- Department of Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Prince of Wales HospitalThe Chinese University of Hong KongHong KongChina
| | | | - Michele Pansini
- Translational SciencePerspectum Diagnostic limitedOxfordUK
- Clinica Di Radiologia EOC, Istituto Di Imaging Della Svizzera Italiana (IIMSI)Ente Ospedaliero CantonaleLuganoSwitzerland
- John Radcliffe HospitalOxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustOxfordUK
| | - Kin Hung Liu
- Department of Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Prince of Wales HospitalThe Chinese University of Hong KongHong KongChina
| | - Terry Cheuk‐Fung Yip
- Medical Data Analytic CentreThe Chinese University of Hong KongHong KongChina
- Department of Medicine and TherapeuticsThe Chinese University of Hong KongHong KongChina
| | - Vincent Wai‐Sun Wong
- Medical Data Analytic CentreThe Chinese University of Hong KongHong KongChina
- Department of Medicine and TherapeuticsThe Chinese University of Hong KongHong KongChina
- Institute of Digestive DiseaseThe Chinese University of Hong KongHong KongChina
| | - Winnie Chiu Wing Chu
- Department of Imaging and Interventional Radiology, Prince of Wales HospitalThe Chinese University of Hong KongHong KongChina
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Qi H, Jiang S, Nan J, Guo H, Cheng C, He X, Jin H, Zhang R, Lei J. Application and research progress of magnetic resonance proton density fat fraction in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: a comprehensive review. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2025; 50:185-197. [PMID: 39048719 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-024-04448-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2024] [Revised: 06/06/2024] [Accepted: 06/07/2024] [Indexed: 07/27/2024]
Abstract
Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease (MASLD), formerly known as Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD), is a chronic liver disorder associated with disturbances in lipid metabolism. The disease is prevalent worldwide, particularly closely linked with metabolic syndromes such as obesity and diabetes. Magnetic Resonance Proton Density Fat Fraction (MRI-PDFF), serving as a non-invasive and highly quantitative imaging assessment tool, holds promising applications in the diagnosis and research of MASLD. This paper aims to comprehensively review and summarize the applications and research progress of MRI-PDFF technology in MASLD, analyze its strengths and challenges, and anticipate its future developments in clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hongyan Qi
- The First Clinical Medical College of Lanzhou University, No.1 Donggang West Road, Chengguan District, Lanzhou City, 730000, Gansu Province, China
| | | | - Jiang Nan
- Department of Radiology, The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
| | - Hang Guo
- Department of Radiology, The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
| | - Cai Cheng
- Department of Radiology, The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
| | - Xin He
- Department of Radiology, The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
| | - Hongyang Jin
- Department of Radiology, The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
| | - Rongfan Zhang
- Department of Radiology, The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
| | - Junqiang Lei
- The First Clinical Medical College of Lanzhou University, No.1 Donggang West Road, Chengguan District, Lanzhou City, 730000, Gansu Province, China.
- Department of Radiology, The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China.
- Radiological Clinical Medicine Research Center of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, Gansu, China.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Simchick G, Zhao R, Yuan Q, Ghasabeh MA, Ruschke S, Karampinos DC, Harris DT, do Vale Souza R, Mattison RJ, Jeng MR, Pedrosa I, Kamel IR, Vasanawala S, Yokoo T, Reeder SB, Hernando D. Practical Application of Multivendor MRI-Based R2* Mapping for Liver Iron Quantification at 1.5 T and 3.0 T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2025; 61:150-165. [PMID: 38662618 PMCID: PMC11502507 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.29401] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2023] [Revised: 04/08/2024] [Accepted: 04/09/2024] [Indexed: 10/26/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recent multicenter, multivendor MRI-based R2* vs. liver iron concentration (LIC) calibrations (i.e., MCMV calibrations) may facilitate broad clinical dissemination of R2*-based LIC quantification. However, these calibrations are based on a centralized offline R2* reconstruction, and their applicability with vendor-provided R2* maps is unclear. PURPOSE To determine R2* ranges of agreement between the centralized and three MRI vendors' R2* reconstructions. STUDY TYPE Prospective. SUBJECTS Two hundred and seven subjects (mean age 37.6 ± 19.6 years; 117 male) with known or suspected iron overload from four academic medical centers. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE Standardized multiecho spoiled gradient echo sequence at 1.5 T and 3.0 T for R2* mapping and a multiple spin-echo sequence at 1.5 T for LIC quantification. MRI vendors: GE Healthcare, Philips Healthcare, and Siemens Healthineers. ASSESSMENT R2* maps were generated using both the centralized and vendor reconstructions, and ranges of agreement were determined. R2*-LIC linear calibrations were determined for each site, field strength, and reconstruction and compared with the MCMV calibrations. STATISTICAL TESTS Bland-Altman analysis to determine ranges of agreement. Linear regression, analysis of covariance F tests, and Tukey's multiple comparison testing to assess reproducibility of calibrations across sites and vendors. A P value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS The upper limits of R2* ranges of agreement were approximately 500, 375, and 330 s-1 for GE, Philips, and Siemens reconstructions, respectively, at 1.5 T and approximately 700 and 800 s-1 for GE and Philips, respectively, at 3.0 T. Within the R2* ranges of agreement, vendor R2*-LIC calibrations demonstrated high reproducibility (no significant differences between slopes or intercepts; P ≥ 0.06) and agreed with the MCMV calibrations (overlapping 95% confidence intervals). DATA CONCLUSION Based on the determined upper limits, R2* measurements obtained from vendor-provided R2* maps may be reliably and practically used to quantify LIC less than approximately 8-13 mg/g using the MCMV calibrations and similar acquisition parameters as this study. EVIDENCE LEVEL 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 3.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ruiyang Zhao
- RadiologyUniversity of Wisconsin‐MadisonMadisonWisconsinUSA
- Medical PhysicsUniversity of Wisconsin‐MadisonMadisonWisconsinUSA
| | - Qing Yuan
- RadiologyUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasTexasUSA
| | | | - Stefan Ruschke
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der IsarTechnical University of MunichMunichGermany
| | - Dimitrios C. Karampinos
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine, Klinikum rechts der IsarTechnical University of MunichMunichGermany
| | | | | | | | - Michael R. Jeng
- Pediatrics – Hematology & OncologyStanford UniversityPalo AltoCaliforniaUSA
| | - Ivan Pedrosa
- RadiologyUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasTexasUSA
- Advanced Imaging Research CenterUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasTexasUSA
| | - Ihab R. Kamel
- RadiologyJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreMarylandUSA
| | | | - Takeshi Yokoo
- RadiologyUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasTexasUSA
- Advanced Imaging Research CenterUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasTexasUSA
| | - Scott B. Reeder
- RadiologyUniversity of Wisconsin‐MadisonMadisonWisconsinUSA
- Medical PhysicsUniversity of Wisconsin‐MadisonMadisonWisconsinUSA
- MedicineUniversity of Wisconsin‐MadisonMadisonWisconsinUSA
- Biomedical EngineeringUniversity of Wisconsin‐MadisonMadisonWisconsinUSA
- Emergency MedicineUniversity of Wisconsin‐MadisonMadisonWisconsinUSA
| | - Diego Hernando
- RadiologyUniversity of Wisconsin‐MadisonMadisonWisconsinUSA
- Medical PhysicsUniversity of Wisconsin‐MadisonMadisonWisconsinUSA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Simchick G, Allen TJ, Hernando D. Reproducibility of intravoxel incoherent motion quantification in the liver across field strengths and gradient hardware. Magn Reson Med 2024; 92:2652-2669. [PMID: 39119838 PMCID: PMC11436311 DOI: 10.1002/mrm.30237] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2024] [Revised: 06/19/2024] [Accepted: 07/11/2024] [Indexed: 08/10/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate reproducibility and interlobar agreement of intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) quantification in the liver across field strengths and MR scanners with different gradient hardware. METHODS Cramer-Rao lower bound optimization was performed to determine optimized monopolar and motion-robust 2D (b-value and first-order motion moment [M1]) IVIM-DWI acquisitions. Eleven healthy volunteers underwent diffusion MRI of the liver, where each optimized acquisition was obtained five times across three MRI scanners. For each data set, IVIM estimates (diffusion coefficient (D), pseudo-diffusion coefficients (d 1 * $$ {d}_1^{\ast } $$ andd 2 * $$ {d}_2^{\ast } $$ ), blood velocity SDs (Vb1 and Vb2), and perfusion fractions [f1 and f2]) were obtained in the right and left liver lobes using two signal models (pseudo-diffusion and M1-dependent physical) with and without T2 correction (fc1 and fc2) and three fitting techniques (tri-exponential region of interest-based full and segmented fitting and blood velocity SD distribution fitting). Reproducibility and interlobar agreement were compared across methods using within-subject and pairwise coefficients of variation (CVw and CVp), paired sample t-tests, and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS Using a combination of motion-robust 2D (b-M1) data acquisition, M1-dependent physical signal modeling with T2 correction, and blood velocity SD distribution fitting, multiscanner reproducibility with median CVw = 5.09%, 11.3%, 9.20%, 14.2%, and 12.6% for D, Vb1, Vb2, fc1, and fc2, respectively, and interlobar agreement with CVp = 8.14%, 11.9%, 8.50%, 49.9%, and 42.0%, respectively, was achieved. CONCLUSION Recently proposed advanced IVIM acquisition, signal modeling, and fitting techniques may facilitate reproducible IVIM quantification in the liver, as needed for establishment of IVIM-based quantitative biomarkers for detection, staging, and treatment monitoring of diseases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregory Simchick
- Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Timothy J Allen
- Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Diego Hernando
- Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Ferraioli G, Roccarina D, Barr RG. Intersystem and Interoperator Agreement of US Attenuation Coefficient for Quantifying Liver Steatosis. Radiology 2024; 313:e240162. [PMID: 39470421 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.240162] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/30/2024]
Abstract
Background The extent of liver steatosis can be assessed using US attenuation coefficient (AC) algorithms currently implemented in several US systems. However, little is known about intersystem and interoperator variability in measurements. Purpose To assess intersystem and interoperator agreement in US AC measurements for fat quantification in individuals with varying degrees of liver steatosis and to assess the correlation of each manufacturer's AC algorithm results with MRI proton density fat fraction (PDFF). Materials and Methods This prospective study was conducted at Southwoods Imaging, Youngstown, Ohio, September 30-October 1, 2023. Two operators independently obtained AC measurements using eight US systems equipped with an AC algorithm from different manufacturers. On the same day, MRI PDFF measurement was performed by a different operator. Correlation between US AC and MRI PDFF was assessed using a mixed-effects model. Agreement between systems and operators was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results Twenty-six individuals (mean age, 55.4 years ± 10.7 [SD]; 16 female participants) were evaluated. The correlation of US AC with MRI PDFF was high for five AC algorithms (r range, 0.70-0.86), moderate for two (r = 0.62 for both), and poor for one (r = 0.47). In pairwise comparisons, none of the pairs of systems achieved excellent agreement (overall ICC = 0.33 [95% CI: 0.15, 0.52]). One pair showed good agreement (ICC = 0.79 [95% CI: 0.66, 0.87]), eight pairs showed moderate agreement (ICC range, 0.50 [95% CI: 0.22, 0.69] to 0.73 [95% CI: 0.49, 0.85]), and 19 pairs showed poor agreement (ICC range, 0.11 [95% CI: -0.06, 0.37] to 0.48 [95% CI: 0.20, 0.67]). Interoperator agreement on AC value was excellent for the Samsung Medison algorithm (ICC = 0.90 [95% CI: 0.80, 0.96]), good for the Siemens Healthineers (ICC = 0.76 [95% CI: 0.54, 0.89]) and Canon Medical Systems (ICC = 0.76 [95% CI: 0.16, 0.92]) algorithms, and moderate for the remaining algorithms (ICC range, 0.50 [95% CI: 0.16, 0.73] to 0.74 [95% CI: 0.51, 0.88]). The mean AC value obtained by the two operators did not differ for any system except the system from Canon Medical Systems. Conclusion There was substantial variability in AC values obtained with different US systems, precluding interchangeability between systems for liver steatosis diagnosis and follow-up imaging. Interoperator agreement ranged from moderate to excellent. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Han in this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giovanna Ferraioli
- From the Department of Clinical-Surgical, Diagnostic, and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Division of Internal Medicine and Hepatology, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Firenze, Italy (D.R.); Sherlock Liver Unit and UCL Institute for Liver and Digestive Health, Royal Free Hospital, London, England (D.R.); Department of Radiology, Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); and Southwoods Imaging, 7623 Market St, Youngstown, OH 44512 (R.G.B.)
| | - Davide Roccarina
- From the Department of Clinical-Surgical, Diagnostic, and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Division of Internal Medicine and Hepatology, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Firenze, Italy (D.R.); Sherlock Liver Unit and UCL Institute for Liver and Digestive Health, Royal Free Hospital, London, England (D.R.); Department of Radiology, Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); and Southwoods Imaging, 7623 Market St, Youngstown, OH 44512 (R.G.B.)
| | - Richard G Barr
- From the Department of Clinical-Surgical, Diagnostic, and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Division of Internal Medicine and Hepatology, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Careggi, Firenze, Italy (D.R.); Sherlock Liver Unit and UCL Institute for Liver and Digestive Health, Royal Free Hospital, London, England (D.R.); Department of Radiology, Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); and Southwoods Imaging, 7623 Market St, Youngstown, OH 44512 (R.G.B.)
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Serai SD, Robson MD, Tirkes T, Trout AT. T 1 Mapping of the Abdomen, From the AJR "How We Do It" Special Series. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2024. [PMID: 39194308 DOI: 10.2214/ajr.24.31643] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/29/2024]
Abstract
By exploiting different tissues' characteristic T1 relaxation times, T1-weighted images help distinguish normal and abnormal tissues, aiding assessment of diffuse and local pathologies. However, such images do not provide quantitative T1 values. Advances in abdominal MRI techniques have enabled measurement of abdominal organs' T1 relaxation times, which can be used to create color-coded quantitative maps. T1 mapping is sensitive to tissue microenvironments including inflammation and fibrosis and has received substantial interest for noninvasive imaging of abdominal organ pathology. In particular, quantitative mapping provides a powerful tool for evaluation of diffuse disease by making apparent changes in T1 occurring across organs that may otherwise be difficult to identify. Quantitative measurement also facilitates sensitive monitoring of longitudinal T1 changes. Increased T1 in liver helps to predict parenchymal fibro-inflammation, in pancreas is associated with reduced exocrine function from chronic or autoimmune pancreatitis, and in kidney is associated with impaired renal function and aids diagnosis of chronic kidney disease. In this review, we describe the acquisition, postprocessing, and analysis of T1 maps in the abdomen and explore applications in liver, spleen, pancreas, and kidney. We highlight practical aspects of implementation and standardization, technical pitfalls and confounding factors, and areas of likely greatest clinical impact.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Suraj D Serai
- Department of Radiology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | | | - Temel Tirkes
- Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Andrew T Trout
- Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
- Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Jeon SK, Joo I, Park J, Yoo J. Automated hepatic steatosis assessment on dual-energy CT-derived virtual non-contrast images through fully-automated 3D organ segmentation. LA RADIOLOGIA MEDICA 2024; 129:967-976. [PMID: 38869829 PMCID: PMC11252222 DOI: 10.1007/s11547-024-01833-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2024] [Accepted: 05/30/2024] [Indexed: 06/14/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the efficacy of volumetric CT attenuation-based parameters obtained through automated 3D organ segmentation on virtual non-contrast (VNC) images from dual-energy CT (DECT) for assessing hepatic steatosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective study included living liver donor candidates having liver DECT and MRI-determined proton density fat fraction (PDFF) assessments. Employing a 3D deep learning algorithm, the liver and spleen were automatically segmented from VNC images (derived from contrast-enhanced DECT scans) and true non-contrast (TNC) images, respectively. Mean volumetric CT attenuation values of each segmented liver (L) and spleen (S) were measured, allowing for liver attenuation index (LAI) calculation, defined as L minus S. Agreements of VNC and TNC parameters for hepatic steatosis, i.e., L and LAI, were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Correlations between VNC parameters and MRI-PDFF values were assessed using the Pearson's correlation coefficient. Their performance to identify MRI-PDFF ≥ 5% and ≥ 10% was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS Of 252 participants, 56 (22.2%) and 16 (6.3%) had hepatic steatosis with MRI-PDFF ≥ 5% and ≥ 10%, respectively. LVNC and LAIVNC showed excellent agreement with LTNC and LAITNC (ICC = 0.957 and 0.968) and significant correlations with MRI-PDFF values (r = - 0.585 and - 0.588, Ps < 0.001). LVNC and LAIVNC exhibited areas under the ROC curve of 0.795 and 0.806 for MRI-PDFF ≥ 5%; and 0.916 and 0.932, for MRI-PDFF ≥ 10%, respectively. CONCLUSION Volumetric CT attenuation-based parameters from VNC images generated by DECT, via automated 3D segmentation of the liver and spleen, have potential for opportunistic hepatic steatosis screening, as an alternative to TNC images.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sun Kyung Jeon
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital and Seoul National University College of Medicine, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Korea
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Ijin Joo
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital and Seoul National University College of Medicine, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Korea.
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
- Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
| | - Junghoan Park
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital and Seoul National University College of Medicine, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Korea
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Jeongin Yoo
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital and Seoul National University College of Medicine, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul, 03080, Korea
- Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Tamada D, van der Heijden RA, Weaver J, Hernando D, Reeder SB. Confidence maps for reliable estimation of proton density fat fraction and R 2 * in the liver. Magn Reson Med 2024; 91:2172-2187. [PMID: 38174431 PMCID: PMC10950533 DOI: 10.1002/mrm.29986] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2023] [Revised: 10/31/2023] [Accepted: 12/06/2023] [Indexed: 01/05/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE The objective was to develop a fully automated algorithm that generates confidence maps to identify regions valid for analysis of quantitative proton density fat fraction (PDFF) andR 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ maps of the liver, generated with chemical shift-encoded MRI (CSE-MRI). Confidence maps are urgently needed for automated quality assurance, particularly with the emergence of automated segmentation and analysis algorithms. METHODS Confidence maps for both PDFF andR 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ maps are generated based on goodness of fit, measured by normalized RMS error between measured complex signals and the CSE-MRI signal model. Based on Cramér-Rao lower bound and Monte-Carlo simulations, normalized RMS error threshold criteria were developed to identify unreliable regions in quantitative maps. Simulation, phantom, and in vivo clinical studies were included. To analyze the clinical data, a board-certified radiologist delineated regions of interest (ROIs) in each of the nine liver segments for PDFF andR 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ analysis in consecutive clinical CSE-MRI data sets. The percent area of ROIs in areas deemed unreliable by confidence maps was calculated to assess the impact of confidence maps on real-world clinical PDFF andR 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ measurements. RESULTS Simulations and phantom studies demonstrated that the proposed algorithm successfully excluded regions with unreliable PDFF andR 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ measurements. ROI analysis by the radiologist revealed that 2.6% and 15% of the ROIs were placed in unreliable areas of PDFF andR 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ maps, as identified by confidence maps. CONCLUSION A proposed confidence map algorithm that identifies reliable areas of PDFF andR 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ measurements from CSE-MRI acquisitions was successfully developed. It demonstrated technical and clinical feasibility.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daiki Tamada
- Departments of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison
| | - Rianne A. van der Heijden
- Departments of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jayse Weaver
- Departments of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison
| | - Diego Hernando
- Departments of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison
- Departments of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison
| | - Scott B Reeder
- Departments of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison
- Departments of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison
- Departments of Biomedcal Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison
- Departments of Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison
- Departments of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Huang M, Zhang F, Li Z, Luo Y, Li J, Wang Z, Ma L, Chen G, Hu X. Fat fraction quantification with MRI estimates tumor proliferation of hepatocellular carcinoma. Front Oncol 2024; 14:1367907. [PMID: 38665944 PMCID: PMC11044697 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1367907] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2024] [Accepted: 03/26/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Purpose To assess the utility of fat fraction quantification using quantitative multi-echo Dixon for evaluating tumor proliferation and microvascular invasion (MVI) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods A total of 66 patients with resection and histopathologic confirmed HCC were enrolled. Preoperative MRI with proton density fat fraction and R2* mapping was analyzed. Intratumoral and peritumoral regions were delineated with manually placed regions of interest at the maximum level of intratumoral fat. Correlation analysis explored the relationship between fat fraction and Ki67. The fat fraction and R2* were compared between high Ki67(>30%) and low Ki67 nodules, and between MVI negative and positive groups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used for further analysis if statistically different. Results The median fat fraction of tumor (tFF) was higher than peritumor liver (5.24% vs 3.51%, P=0.012). The tFF was negatively correlated with Ki67 (r=-0.306, P=0.012), and tFF of high Ki67 nodules was lower than that of low Ki67 nodules (2.10% vs 4.90%, P=0.001). The tFF was a good estimator for low proliferation nodules (AUC 0.747, cut-off 3.39%, sensitivity 0.778, specificity 0.692). There was no significant difference in tFF and R2* between MVI positive and negative nodules (3.00% vs 2.90%, P=0.784; 55.80s-1 vs 49.15s-1, P=0.227). Conclusion We infer that intratumor fat can be identified in HCC and fat fraction quantification using quantitative multi-echo Dixon can distinguish low proliferative HCCs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Gen Chen
- Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China
| | - Xuemei Hu
- Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Wibulpolprasert P, Subpinyo B, Chirnaksorn S, Shantavasinkul PC, Putadechakum S, Phongkitkarun S, Sritara C, Angkathunyakul N, Sumritpradit P. Correlation between magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) and liver biopsy to assess hepatic steatosis in obesity. Sci Rep 2024; 14:6895. [PMID: 38519637 PMCID: PMC10960039 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-57324-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2023] [Accepted: 03/18/2024] [Indexed: 03/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Obesity is highly associated with Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and increased risk of liver cirrhosis and liver cancer-related death. We determined the diagnostic performance of the complex-based chemical shift technique MRI-PDFF for quantifying liver fat and its correlation with histopathologic findings in an obese population within 24 h before bariatric surgery. This was a prospective, cross-sectional, Institutional Review Board-approved study of PDFF-MRI of the liver and MRI-DIXON image volume before bariatric surgery. Liver tissues were obtained during bariatric surgery. The prevalence of NAFLD in the investigated cohort was as high as 94%. Histologic hepatic steatosis grades 0, 1, 2, and 3 were observed in 3 (6%), 25 (50%), 14 (28%), and 8 (16%) of 50 obese patients, respectively. The mean percentages of MRI-PDFF from the anterior and posterior right hepatic lobe and left lobe vs. isolate left hepatic lobe were 15.6% (standard deviation [SD], 9.28%) vs. 16.29% (SD, 9.25%). There was a strong correlation between the percentage of steatotic hepatocytes and MRI-PDFF in the left hepatic lobe (r = 0.82, p < 0.001) and the mean value (r = 0.78, p < 0.001). There was a strong correlation between MRI-derived subcutaneous adipose tissue volume and total body fat mass by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, especially at the L2-3 and L4 level (r = 0.85, p < 0.001). MRI-PDFF showed good performance in assessing hepatic steatosis and was an excellent noninvasive technique for monitoring hepatic steatosis in an obese population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pornphan Wibulpolprasert
- Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Radiology, Mahidol University, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand
| | - Benya Subpinyo
- Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Radiology, Mahidol University, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand
| | | | | | | | - Sith Phongkitkarun
- Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Radiology, Mahidol University, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand
| | - Chanika Sritara
- Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Radiology, Mahidol University, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand
| | | | - Preeda Sumritpradit
- Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Chooi YC, Zhang QA, Magkos F, Ng M, Michael N, Wu X, Volchanskaya VSB, Lai X, Wanjaya ER, Elejalde U, Goh CC, Yap CPL, Wong LH, Lim KJ, Velan SS, Yaligar J, Muthiah MD, Chong YS, Loo EXL, Eriksson JG. Effect of an Asian-adapted Mediterranean diet and pentadecanoic acid on fatty liver disease: the TANGO randomized controlled trial. Am J Clin Nutr 2024; 119:788-799. [PMID: 38035997 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajcnut.2023.11.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2023] [Revised: 11/15/2023] [Accepted: 11/25/2023] [Indexed: 12/02/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Weight loss is the most effective treatment for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). There is evidence that the Mediterranean diets rich in unsaturated fatty acids and fiber have beneficial effects on weight homeostasis and metabolic risk factors in individuals with NAFLD. Studies have also shown that higher circulating concentrations of pentadecanoic acid (C15:0) are associated with a lower risk for NAFLD. OBJECTIVES To examine the effects of a Mediterranean-like, culturally contextualized Asian diet rich in fiber and unsaturated fatty acids, with or without C15:0 supplementation, in Chinese females with NAFLD. METHODS In a double-blinded, parallel-design, randomized controlled trial, 88 Chinese females with NAFLD were randomly assigned to 1 of the 3 groups for 12 wk: diet with C15:0 supplementation (n = 31), diet without C15:0 supplementation (n = 28), or control (habitual diet and no C15:0 supplementation, n = 29). At baseline and after the intervention, body fat percentage, intrahepatic lipid content, muscle and abdominal fat, liver enzymes, cardiometabolic risk factors, and gut microbiome were assessed. RESULTS In the intention-to-treat analysis, weight reductions of 4.0 ± 0.5 kg (5.3%), 3.4 ± 0.5 kg (4.5%), and 1.5 ± 0.5 kg (2.1%) were achieved in the diet-with-C15:0, diet without-C15:0, and the control groups, respectively. The proton density fat fraction (PDFF) of the liver decreased by 33%, 30%, and 10%, respectively. Both diet groups achieved significantly greater reductions in body weight, liver PDFF, total cholesterol, gamma-glutamyl transferase, and triglyceride concentrations compared with the control group. C15:0 supplementation reduced LDL-cholesterol further, and increased the abundance of Bifidobacterium adolescentis. Fat mass, visceral adipose tissue, subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue (deep and superficial), insulin, glycated hemoglobin, and blood pressure decreased significantly in all groups, in parallel with weight loss. CONCLUSION Mild weight loss induced by a Mediterranean-like diet adapted for Asians has multiple beneficial health effects in females with NAFLD. C15:0 supplementation lowers LDL-cholesterol and may cause beneficial shifts in the gut microbiome. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER This trial was registered at the clinicaltrials.gov as NCT05259475.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu Chung Chooi
- Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences (SICS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore.
| | - Qinze Arthur Zhang
- Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences (SICS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore
| | - Faidon Magkos
- Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Denmark
| | - Maisie Ng
- Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences (SICS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore; Bioinformatics Institute (BII), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore
| | - Navin Michael
- Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences (SICS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore
| | - Xiaorong Wu
- WIL@NUS Corporate Laboratory, National University of Singapore (NUS), Center for Translational Medicine, Singapore
| | | | - Xianning Lai
- WIL@NUS Corporate Laboratory, National University of Singapore (NUS), Center for Translational Medicine, Singapore
| | - Elvy Riani Wanjaya
- WIL@NUS Corporate Laboratory, National University of Singapore (NUS), Center for Translational Medicine, Singapore
| | - Untzizu Elejalde
- WIL@NUS Corporate Laboratory, National University of Singapore (NUS), Center for Translational Medicine, Singapore
| | - Chew Chan Goh
- WIL@NUS Corporate Laboratory, National University of Singapore (NUS), Center for Translational Medicine, Singapore
| | - Clara Poh Lian Yap
- WIL@NUS Corporate Laboratory, National University of Singapore (NUS), Center for Translational Medicine, Singapore
| | - Long Hui Wong
- WIL@NUS Corporate Laboratory, National University of Singapore (NUS), Center for Translational Medicine, Singapore.
| | - Kevin Junliang Lim
- WIL@NUS Corporate Laboratory, National University of Singapore (NUS), Center for Translational Medicine, Singapore
| | - S Sendhil Velan
- Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences (SICS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore
| | - Jadegoud Yaligar
- Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences (SICS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore
| | - Mark Dhinesh Muthiah
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, National University Health System, Singapore; National University Centre for Organ Transplantation, Singapore
| | - Yap Seng Chong
- Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences (SICS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore; Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore (NUS), Singapore
| | - Evelyn Xiu Ling Loo
- Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences (SICS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore; Department of Paediatrics and Human Potential Translational Research Programme, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore (NUS), Singapore
| | - Johan G Eriksson
- Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences (SICS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore; Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore (NUS), Singapore; Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland; Folkhälsan Research Center, Helsinki, Finland.
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Imajo K, Saigusa Y, Kobayashi T, Nagai K, Nishida S, Kawamura N, Doi H, Iwaki M, Nogami A, Honda Y, Kessoku T, Ogawa Y, Kirikoshi H, Yasuda S, Toyoda H, Hayashi H, Kokubu S, Utsunomiya D, Takahashi H, Aishima S, Kim BK, Tamaki N, Saito S, Yoneda M, Loomba R, Nakajima A. M-PAST score is better than MAST score for the diagnosis of active fibrotic nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Hepatol Res 2023; 53:844-856. [PMID: 37237426 PMCID: PMC10792544 DOI: 10.1111/hepr.13927] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2023] [Revised: 04/26/2023] [Accepted: 05/05/2023] [Indexed: 05/28/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Clinical trials enroll patients with active fibrotic nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) (nonalcoholic fatty liver disease [NAFLD] activity score ≥ 4) and significant fibrosis (F ≥ 2); however, screening failure rates are high following biopsy. We developed new scores to identify active fibrotic NASH using FibroScan and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS We undertook prospective primary (n = 176), retrospective validation (n = 169), and University of California San Diego (UCSD; n = 234) studies of liver biopsy-proven NAFLD. Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) using FibroScan or magnetic resonance elastography (MRE), controlled attenuation parameter (CAP), or proton density fat fraction (PDFF), and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) were combined to develop a two-step strategy-FibroScan-based LSM followed by CAP with AST (F-CAST) and MRE-based LSM followed by PDFF with AST (M-PAST)-and compared with FibroScan-AST (FAST) and MRI-AST (MAST) for diagnosing active fibrotic NASH. Each model was categorized using rule-in and rule-out criteria. RESULTS Areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) of F-CAST (0.826) and M-PAST (0.832) were significantly higher than those of FAST (0.744, p = 0.004) and MAST (0.710, p < 0.001). Following the rule-in criteria, positive predictive values of F-CAST (81.8%) and M-PAST (81.8%) were higher than those of FAST (73.5%) and MAST (70.0%). Following the rule-out criteria, negative predictive values of F-CAST (90.5%) and M-PAST (90.9%) were higher than those of FAST (84.0%) and MAST (73.9%). In the validation and UCSD cohorts, AUROCs did not differ significantly between F-CAST and FAST, but M-PAST had a higher diagnostic performance than MAST. CONCLUSIONS The two-step strategy, especially M-PAST, showed reliability of rule-in/-out for active fibrotic NASH, with better predictive performance compared with MAST. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (number, UMIN000012757).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kento Imajo
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Shin-yurigaoka General Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan
| | - Yusuke Saigusa
- Department of Biostatistics, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Takashi Kobayashi
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Koki Nagai
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Shin-yurigaoka General Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan
| | - Shinya Nishida
- Department of Gastroenterology, Shin-yurigaoka General Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan
| | - Nobuyoshi Kawamura
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Shin-yurigaoka General Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan
| | - Hiroyoshi Doi
- Department of Gastroenterology, Shin-yurigaoka General Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan
| | - Michihiro Iwaki
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Asako Nogami
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Yasushi Honda
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Takaomi Kessoku
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Yuji Ogawa
- Department of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Yokohama Medical Center, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Hiroyuki Kirikoshi
- Department of Clinical Laboratory, Yokohama City University Hospital, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Satoshi Yasuda
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Ogaki Municipal Hospital, Gifu, Japan
| | - Hidenori Toyoda
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Ogaki Municipal Hospital, Gifu, Japan
| | - Hideki Hayashi
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Gifu Municipal Hospital, Gifu, Japan
| | - Shigehiro Kokubu
- Department of Gastroenterology, Shin-yurigaoka General Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan
| | - Daisuke Utsunomiya
- Department of Radiology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Hirokazu Takahashi
- Division of Metabolism and Endocrinology, Faculty of Medicine, Saga University, Saga, Japan
| | - Shinichi Aishima
- Department of Pathology and Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Saga University, Saga, Japan
| | - Beom Kyung Kim
- NAFLD Research Center, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA
| | - Nobuharu Tamaki
- NAFLD Research Center, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Musashino Red Cross Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Satoru Saito
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Masato Yoneda
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Rohit Loomba
- NAFLD Research Center, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA
| | - Atsushi Nakajima
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Torkzaban M, Wessner CE, Halegoua-DeMarzio D, Rodgers SK, Lyshchik A, Nam K. Diagnostic Performance Comparison Between Ultrasound Attenuation Measurements From Right and Left Hepatic Lobes for Steatosis Detection in Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. Acad Radiol 2023; 30:1838-1845. [PMID: 36586759 PMCID: PMC10307925 DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2022.12.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2022] [Revised: 11/21/2022] [Accepted: 12/16/2022] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is currently diagnosed by liver biopsy or MRI proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) from left hepatic lobe (LTHL) and/or right hepatic lobe (RTHL). The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic value of ultrasound attenuation coefficients (ACs) from RTHL and LTHL in detecting hepatic steatosis using biopsy or MRI-PDFF as a reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS Sixty-six patients with suspected NAFLD were imaged with an Aplio i800 ultrasound scanner (Canon Medical Systems, Tustin, CA). Five AC measurements from RTHL and LTHL were averaged separately and together to be compared with the reference standard. RESULTS Forty-seven patients (71%) were diagnosed with NAFLD. Mean ACs were significantly higher in fatty livers than non-fatty livers (RTHL: 0.73 ± 0.10 vs. 0.63 ± 0.07 dB/cm/MHZ; p < 0.0001, LTHL: 0.78 ± 0.11 vs. 0.63 ± 0.06 dB/cm/MHz; p < 0.0001, RTHL & LTHL: 0.76 ± 0.09 vs. 0.63 ± 0.05 dB/cm/MHz; p < 0.0001). Biopsy steatosis grades (n =31) were better correlated with the mean ACs of RTHL & LTHL (r = 0.72) compared to LTHL (r = 0.67) or RTHL (r = 0.61). Correlation between MRI-PDFF (n = 35) and mean ACs was better for LTHL (r = 0.69) compared to the RTHL & LTHL (r = 0.66) or RTHL (r = 0.45). Higher diagnostic accuracy was shown for the mean ACs of RTHL & LTHL (AUC 0.89, specificity 94%, sensitivity 78%) compared to LTHL (AUC 0.89, specificity 88%, sensitivity 82%) or RTHL (AUC 0.81, specificity 89%, sensitivity 68%). CONCLUSION Ultrasound ACs from RTHL and LTHL showed comparable diagnostic values in detection of hepatic steatosis with the highest diagnostic accuracy when they were averaged together.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mehnoosh Torkzaban
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Corinne E Wessner
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Dina Halegoua-DeMarzio
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Shuchi K Rodgers
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Andrej Lyshchik
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Kibo Nam
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Cai Y, Wang S, Wang S, Gu Q, Huang Y, Li J, Wang R, Liu X. Effects of Yijinjing combined with resistance training on body fat distribution and hepatic lipids in middle-aged and older people with prediabetes mellitus: A randomized controlled trial. Exp Gerontol 2023; 179:112250. [PMID: 37391104 DOI: 10.1016/j.exger.2023.112250] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2023] [Revised: 06/01/2023] [Accepted: 06/26/2023] [Indexed: 07/02/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE This randomized controlled trial aimed to study the effects of Yijinjing plus Elastic Band Resistance exercise on intrahepatic lipid (IHL), body fat distribution, glucolipid metabolism and biomarkers of inflammation in middle-aged and older people with pre-diabetes mellitus (PDM). PARTICIPANTS AGESND METHODS 34 PDM participants (mean age, 62.62 ± 4.71 years; body mass index [BMI], 25.98 ± 2.44 kg/m2) were randomly assigned to the exercise group (n = 17) or control group (n = 17). The exercise group performed moderate-intensity Yijinjing and Elastic Band Resistance training 5 times per week for 6 months. The control group maintained their previous lifestyle. We measured body composition (body weight and body fat distribution), IHL, plasma glucose, lipid and the homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), inflammatory cytokines at baseline and 6 months. RESULTS Compared with baseline, exercise significantly reduced IHL (reduction of 1.91 % ± 2.61 % vs an increase of 0.38 % ± 1.85 % for controls; P = 0.007), BMI (reduction of 1.38 ± 0.88 kg/m2 vs an increase of 0.24 ± 1.02 kg/m2 for controls; P = 0.001), upper limb fat mass, thigh fat mass and whole body fat mass. Fasting glucose, HOMA-IR, plasma total cholesterol (TC), and triglyceride (TG) were decreased in the exercise group (P < 0.05). There were no effects of exercise on liver enzyme levels and inflammatory cytokines. The decrease in IHL was positively correlated with the decreases in BMI, body fat mass and HOMA-IR. CONCLUSION Six months of Yijinjing and resistance exercise significantly reduced hepatic lipids and body fat mass in middle-aged and older people with PDM. These effects were accompanied by weight loss, improved glycolipid metabolism and insulin resistance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yanwei Cai
- Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai 200438, China; Shanghai Deji Hospital, Qingdao University, Putuo District, Shanghai 200331, China
| | - Suijun Wang
- Department of Endocrinology, Shidong Hospital, Yangpu District, Shanghai 200433, China
| | - Shasha Wang
- Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai 200438, China
| | - Qing Gu
- Department of Endocrinology, Shidong Hospital, Yangpu District, Shanghai 200433, China
| | - Yunda Huang
- Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai 200438, China
| | - Jingyuan Li
- Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai 200438, China
| | - Ru Wang
- Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai 200438, China.
| | - Xiangyun Liu
- Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai 200438, China.
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Guglielmo FF, Barr RG, Yokoo T, Ferraioli G, Lee JT, Dillman JR, Horowitz JM, Jhaveri KS, Miller FH, Modi RY, Mojtahed A, Ohliger MA, Pirasteh A, Reeder SB, Shanbhogue K, Silva AC, Smith EN, Surabhi VR, Taouli B, Welle CL, Yeh BM, Venkatesh SK. Liver Fibrosis, Fat, and Iron Evaluation with MRI and Fibrosis and Fat Evaluation with US: A Practical Guide for Radiologists. Radiographics 2023; 43:e220181. [PMID: 37227944 DOI: 10.1148/rg.220181] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
Quantitative imaging biomarkers of liver disease measured by using MRI and US are emerging as important clinical tools in the management of patients with chronic liver disease (CLD). Because of their high accuracy and noninvasive nature, in many cases, these techniques have replaced liver biopsy for the diagnosis, quantitative staging, and treatment monitoring of patients with CLD. The most commonly evaluated imaging biomarkers are surrogates for liver fibrosis, fat, and iron. MR elastography is now routinely performed to evaluate for liver fibrosis and typically combined with MRI-based liver fat and iron quantification to exclude or grade hepatic steatosis and iron overload, respectively. US elastography is also widely performed to evaluate for liver fibrosis and has the advantage of lower equipment cost and greater availability compared with those of MRI. Emerging US fat quantification methods can be performed along with US elastography. The author group, consisting of members of the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) Liver Fibrosis Disease-Focused Panel (DFP), the SAR Hepatic Iron Overload DFP, and the European Society of Radiology, review the basics of liver fibrosis, fat, and iron quantification with MRI and liver fibrosis and fat quantification with US. The authors cover technical requirements, typical case display, quality control and proper measurement technique and case interpretation guidelines, pitfalls, and confounding factors. The authors aim to provide a practical guide for radiologists interpreting these examinations. © RSNA, 2023 See the invited commentary by Ronot in this issue. Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Flavius F Guglielmo
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Richard G Barr
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Takeshi Yokoo
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Giovanna Ferraioli
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - James T Lee
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Jonathan R Dillman
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Jeanne M Horowitz
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Kartik S Jhaveri
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Frank H Miller
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Roshan Y Modi
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Amirkasra Mojtahed
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Michael A Ohliger
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Ali Pirasteh
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Scott B Reeder
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Krishna Shanbhogue
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Alvin C Silva
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Elainea N Smith
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Venkateswar R Surabhi
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Bachir Taouli
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Christopher L Welle
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Benjamin M Yeh
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| | - Sudhakar K Venkatesh
- From the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St, Philadelphia, PA 19107 (F.F.G.); Department of Radiology, Northeastern Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, Ohio (R.G.B.); Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.); Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy (G.F.); Department of Radiology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Ky (J.T.L.); Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio (J.R.D.); Department of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Ill (J.M.H., F.H.M.); Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (K.S.J.); Department of Radiology, ChristianaCare, Newark, Del (R.Y.M.); Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.); Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, Calif (M.A.O., B.M.Y.); Departments of Radiology and Medical Physics (A.P.) and Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis; Department of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY (K.S.); Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Ariz (A.C.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala (E.N.S.); Department of Radiology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex (V.R.S.); Department of Diagnostic, Molecular and Interventional Radiology, BioMedical Engineering and Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (B.T.); and Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (C.L.W., S.K.V.)
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Reeder SB, Yokoo T, França M, Hernando D, Alberich-Bayarri Á, Alústiza JM, Gandon Y, Henninger B, Hillenbrand C, Jhaveri K, Karçaaltıncaba M, Kühn JP, Mojtahed A, Serai SD, Ward R, Wood JC, Yamamura J, Martí-Bonmatí L. Quantification of Liver Iron Overload with MRI: Review and Guidelines from the ESGAR and SAR. Radiology 2023; 307:e221856. [PMID: 36809220 PMCID: PMC10068892 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.221856] [Citation(s) in RCA: 57] [Impact Index Per Article: 28.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2022] [Revised: 10/20/2022] [Accepted: 11/16/2022] [Indexed: 02/23/2023]
Abstract
Accumulation of excess iron in the body, or systemic iron overload, results from a variety of causes. The concentration of iron in the liver is linearly related to the total body iron stores and, for this reason, quantification of liver iron concentration (LIC) is widely regarded as the best surrogate to assess total body iron. Historically assessed using biopsy, there is a clear need for noninvasive quantitative imaging biomarkers of LIC. MRI is highly sensitive to the presence of tissue iron and has been increasingly adopted as a noninvasive alternative to biopsy for detection, severity grading, and treatment monitoring in patients with known or suspected iron overload. Multiple MRI strategies have been developed in the past 2 decades, based on both gradient-echo and spin-echo imaging, including signal intensity ratio and relaxometry strategies. However, there is a general lack of consensus regarding the appropriate use of these methods. The overall goal of this article is to summarize the current state of the art in the clinical use of MRI to quantify liver iron content and to assess the overall level of evidence of these various methods. Based on this summary, expert consensus panel recommendations on best practices for MRI-based quantification of liver iron are provided.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Scott B. Reeder
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Takeshi Yokoo
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Manuela França
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Diego Hernando
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Ángel Alberich-Bayarri
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - José María Alústiza
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Yves Gandon
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Benjamin Henninger
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Claudia Hillenbrand
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Kartik Jhaveri
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Musturay Karçaaltıncaba
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Jens-Peter Kühn
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Amirkasra Mojtahed
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Suraj D. Serai
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Richard Ward
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - John C. Wood
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Jin Yamamura
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| | - Luis Martí-Bonmatí
- From the Departments of Radiology (S.B.R., D.H.), Medical Physics
(S.B.R., D.H.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine (S.B.R.), and
Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, Room 2472, 1111 Highland
Ave, Madison, WI 53705; Department of Radiology and Advanced Imaging Research
Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex (T.Y.);
Department of Radiology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto,
Oporto, Portugal (M.F.); Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI230-PREBI),
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain
(Á.A.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL,
Valencia, Spain (Á.A.B.); Osatek, Magnetic Resonance Unit, Donostia
University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain (J.M.A.); Department of
Radiology, University Hospital and University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France
(Y.G.); Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck,
Austria (B.H.); Research Imaging NSW, Division of Research & Enterprise,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia (C.H.); Joint Department of
Medical Imaging (K.J.) and Department of Medicine (R.W.), University Health
Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Liver Imaging Team, Department
of Radiology, Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey (M.K.);
Institute and Policlinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University
Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden,
Germany (J.P.K.); Department of Radiology, Division of Abdominal Imaging,
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.M.);
Department of Radiology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, University
of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pa (S.D.S.); Division of
Pediatric Cardiology, Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, Los Angeles,
Calif (J.C.W.); Center of Radiology & Endoscopy, Department of Diagnostic
& Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf,
Hamburg, Germany (J.Y.); and Medical Imaging Department and Biomedical Imaging
Research Group, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Health
Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (L.M.B.)
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Tahmasebi A, Wang S, Wessner CE, Vu T, Liu JB, Forsberg F, Civan J, Guglielmo FF, Eisenbrey JR. Ultrasound-Based Machine Learning Approach for Detection of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE : OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE 2023. [PMID: 36807314 DOI: 10.1002/jum.16194] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2022] [Revised: 12/05/2022] [Accepted: 01/25/2023] [Indexed: 06/18/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Current diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) relies on biopsy or MR-based fat quantification. This prospective study explored the use of ultrasound with artificial intelligence for the detection of NAFLD. METHODS One hundred and twenty subjects with clinical suspicion of NAFLD and 10 healthy volunteers consented to participate in this institutional review board-approved study. Subjects were categorized as NAFLD and non-NAFLD according to MR proton density fat fraction (PDFF) findings. Ultrasound images from 10 different locations in the right and left hepatic lobes were collected following a standard protocol. MRI-based liver fat quantification was used as the reference standard with >6.4% indicative of NAFLD. A supervised machine learning model was developed for assessment of NAFLD. To validate model performance, a balanced testing dataset of 24 subjects was used. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and overall accuracy with 95% confidence interval were calculated. RESULTS A total of 1119 images from 106 participants was used for model development. The internal evaluation achieved an average precision of 0.941, recall of 88.2%, and precision of 89.0%. In the testing set AutoML achieved a sensitivity of 72.2% (63.1%-80.1%), specificity of 94.6% (88.7%-98.0%), positive predictive value (PPV) of 93.1% (86.0%-96.7%), negative predictive value of 77.3% (71.6%-82.1%), and accuracy of 83.4% (77.9%-88.0%). The average agreement for an individual subject was 92%. CONCLUSIONS An ultrasound-based machine learning model for identification of NAFLD showed high specificity and PPV in this prospective trial. This approach may in the future be used as an inexpensive and noninvasive screening tool for identifying NAFLD in high-risk patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aylin Tahmasebi
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Shuo Wang
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Corinne E Wessner
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Trang Vu
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Ji-Bin Liu
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Flemming Forsberg
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Jesse Civan
- Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Flavius F Guglielmo
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - John R Eisenbrey
- Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Gao J, Zapata I, Chen J, Erpelding TN, Adamson C, Park D. Quantitative Ultrasound Biomarkers to Assess Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE : OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE 2023. [PMID: 36744595 DOI: 10.1002/jum.16185] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/13/2022] [Revised: 01/08/2023] [Accepted: 01/10/2023] [Indexed: 06/18/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE To assess diagnostic performance of quantitative ultrasound (QUS) biomarkers in assessing hepatic steatosis. METHODS We prospectively recruited 125 participants (mean age 54 years) who underwent liver QUS, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and laboratory tests within 30 days in this IRB approved study. Based on MRI-proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) and MRE, we divided 125 participants into normal liver, nonalcoholic fatty liver (NAFL) and liver fibrosis (≥F1) groups. We examined diagnostic performance of ultrasound attenuation coefficient (AC), normalized local variance (NLV), superb microvascular imaging-based vascularity index (SMI-VI), and shear wave velocity (SWV) for determining hepatic steatosis and fibrosis using area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). We also analyzed correlations of QUS biomarkers to MRI using Spearman correlation coefficient. RESULTS We observed significant differences in AC, NLV, and SMI-VI among the three groups (22 participants with normal liver, 78 with NAFL, and 25 with liver fibrosis). AUC of AC, NLV, and SMI-VI for determining ≥ mild steatotic livers (MRI-PDFF ≥5%) was 0.95, 0.90, and 0.92, respectively. AUC of SWV for determining ≥ F1 liver fibrosis was 0.93. The correlation of MRI-PDFF was positive to AC (r = 0.91) and negative to NLV (r = -0.74), SMI-VI (r = -0.8) in NAFL group. There was a significant difference in regression slope of AC to MRI-PDFF in livers with and without ≥F1 (0.84 vs 0.91, P = .02). CONCLUSIONS QUS biomarkers have high sensitivity and specificity to determine and grade hepatic steatosis and detect liver fibrosis. The effect of liver fibrosis on the performance of QUS biomarkers in quantifying liver fat content warrants further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jing Gao
- Rocky Vista University, Ivins, Utah, USA
- Weill Cornell Medicine, Cornell University, New York, New York, USA
| | | | - Johnson Chen
- Weill Cornell Medicine, Cornell University, New York, New York, USA
| | | | | | - David Park
- Rocky Vista University, Ivins, Utah, USA
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Three segments sampling strategy for the assessment of liver steatosis using magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction. Eur J Radiol 2023; 159:110653. [PMID: 36563563 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2022.110653] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/26/2022] [Revised: 10/28/2022] [Accepted: 12/12/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE This research aims to determine the best liver segments representing the whole-liver fat fraction (FF) in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based measurement of the proton density fat fraction (PDFF). METHOD This retrospective study included 989 adult subjects who underwent MRI-PDFF from March 2018 to January 2021. Three regions of interest (ROI) were measured and averaged for each hepatic segment and the volume-weighted hepatic FF was calculated. Intrahepatic fat variability was assessed by standard deviation between all ROIs. Univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses were done for the factors associated with intrahepatic fat variability among clinical characteristics, blood parameters and the volume-weighted FF. The arithmetic means of specific hepatic segments that were the closest to the volume-weighted FF were identified in all subjects and those with moderate or severe fatty liver. RESULTS The volume-weighted FF was 8.18% and variability was 1.33%. Volume-weighted FF was the only associated factor with intrahepatic variability. The arithmetic mean of segments V, VI, and IV was closest to the volume-weighted FF in all subjects and in subjects with moderate or severe fatty liver. CONCLUSIONS There was considerable heterogeneity in hepatic steatosis between each segment of the liver, and the variability was significantly affected by the volume-weighted FF. The mean hepatic FF from segments V, VI, and IV could be used to estimate the volume-weighted FF of the whole liver, not only in the general population but also in patients with moderate or severe fatty liver.
Collapse
|
30
|
Şendur AB, Şendur HN. A Standardized Approach for MRI-PDFF is Necessary in the Assessment of Diagnostic Performances of the Ultrasound-Based Hepatic Fat Quantification Tools. JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE : OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE 2022; 41:3159-3161. [PMID: 36149356 DOI: 10.1002/jum.16102] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/05/2022] [Accepted: 09/07/2022] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
The recently developed ultrasound-based hepatic fat quantification tools have the potential to be implemented in daily practice with wide acceptance due to inherited advantages of ultrasound technology. Researchers intensively focused on this topic and the accumulated evidences that support clinical usefulness of these tools. However, differences in the researcher-dependent factors of the utilized MRI-PDFF technique, the recommended reference standard, may hinder the better understanding of the diagnostic performances of these tools. Therefore, a standardized approach for MRI-PDFF technique, which is established with international consensus may be considered as important.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Halit Nahit Şendur
- Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Simchick G, Hernando D. Precision of region of interest-based tri-exponential intravoxel incoherent motion quantification and the role of the Intervoxel spatial distribution of flow velocities. Magn Reson Med 2022; 88:2662-2678. [PMID: 35968580 PMCID: PMC9529845 DOI: 10.1002/mrm.29406] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2022] [Revised: 06/27/2022] [Accepted: 07/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this work was to obtain precise tri-exponential intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) quantification in the liver using 2D (b-value and first-order motion moment [M1 ]) IVIM-DWI acquisitions and region of interest (ROI)-based fitting techniques. METHODS Diffusion MRI of the liver was performed in 10 healthy volunteers using three IVIM-DWI acquisitions: conventional monopolar, optimized monopolar, and optimized 2D (b-M1 ). For each acquisition, bi-exponential and tri-exponential full, segmented, and over-segmented ROI-based fitting and a newly proposed blood velocity SDdistribution (BVD) fitting technique were performed to obtain IVIM estimates in the right and left liver lobes. Fitting quality was evaluated using corrected Akaike information criterion. Precision metrics (test-retest repeatability, inter-reader reproducibility, and inter-lobar agreement) were evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis, repeatability/reproducibility coefficients (RPCs), and paired sample t-tests. Precision was compared across acquisitions and fitting methods. RESULTS High repeatability and reproducibility was observed in the estimations of the diffusion coefficient (Dtri = [1.03 ± 0.11] × 10-3 mm2 /s; RPCs ≤ 1.34 × 10-4 mm2 /s), perfusion fractions (F1 = 3.19 ± 1.89% and F2 = 16.4 ± 2.07%; RPCs ≤ 2.51%), and blood velocity SDs (Vb,1 = 1.44 ± 0.14 mm/s and Vb,2 = 3.62 ± 0.13 mm/s; RPCs ≤ 0.41 mm/s) in the right liver lobe using the 2D (b-M1 ) acquisition in conjunction with BVD fitting. Using these methods, significantly larger (p < 0.01) estimates of Dtri and F1 were observed in the left lobe in comparison to the right lobe, while estimates of Vb,1 and Vb,2 demonstrated high interlobar agreement (RPCs ≤ 0.45 mm/s). CONCLUSIONS The 2D (b-M1 ) IVIM-DWI data acquisition in conjunction with BVD fitting enables highly precise tri-exponential IVIM quantification in the right liver lobe.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregory Simchick
- Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, United States
- Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, United States
| | - Diego Hernando
- Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, United States
- Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, United States
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Retrospective comparison of liver chemical shift-encoded PDFF sampling strategies in children and adolescents. ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY (NEW YORK) 2022; 47:3478-3484. [PMID: 35864263 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-022-03615-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2022] [Revised: 07/01/2022] [Accepted: 07/05/2022] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Multiple region-of-interest (ROI) sampling strategies have been described for liver fat quantification by MRI PDFF. While adult studies have shown that sampling strategies including as few as four ROIs provide a reasonable tradeoff between laboriousness and quantitative performance, there is a paucity of similar data for pediatric patients. PURPOSE To assess agreement between different ROI sampling strategies for liver MRI PDFF analysis in children and adolescents. MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective, internal review board-approved study included clinical MRI PDFF acquisitions for 50 children and adolescents. Four different ROI sampling paradigms reported in the literature were reproduced to measure mean liver PDFF. An 18-ROI (2 in each Couinaud segment) paradigm was considered the reference standard. Spearman correlation, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and Bland-Altman analyses were used to quantify agreement. RESULTS Mean age for the 50 participants was 14 ± 2.5 years (range 8-17 years). Based on the 18-ROI paradigm, mean PDFF was significantly higher for the right lobe (24.0 ± 13.7% right, 22.0 ± 13.1% left; p = 0.001). PDFF values for each individual Couinaud segment were highly correlated with the reference standard (ρ = 0.977 to 0.993, p < 0.0001). PDFF values derived from all sampling paradigms, including strategies using large free-hand ROIs, were strongly correlated with the reference standard (ρ = 0.995 to 0.998, p < 0.0001) with excellent agreement (ICC range 0.995 to 0.998). CONCLUSION Liver PDFF sampling paradigms using large ROIs showed strong correlation, excellent agreement, and nonsignificant mean differences from a reference standard paradigm sampling every Couinaud segment in children. Paradigms that exclusively sample the right lobe may overestimate liver PDFF.
Collapse
|
33
|
Dillman JR, Tkach JA, Pedneker A, Trout AT. Quantitative abdominal magnetic resonance imaging in children-special considerations. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2022; 47:3069-3077. [PMID: 34196762 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-021-03191-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2021] [Revised: 06/20/2021] [Accepted: 06/21/2021] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
Abstract
The use of quantitative MRI methods for assessment of the abdomen in children has become commonplace over the past decade. Increasingly employed methods include MR elastography, chemical shift encoded (CSE) MR imaging for determination of proton density fat fraction, diffusion-weighted imaging, and a variety of relaxometry techniques, such as T1 and T2* mapping. These techniques can be used in a variety of settings to distinguish normal from abnormal tissue as well as determine the severity of disease. The performance of quantitative MRI methods in the pediatric population presents unique challenges as compared to adult populations. These challenges relate to multiple factors, including patient size, pediatric physiology, inability to breath hold, and greater physical motion during the examination. The purpose of this review article is to review quantitative MRI methods that may be used in clinical practice to assess the pediatric abdomen and to discuss special considerations when performing these techniques in children.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan R Dillman
- Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Avenue, Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA.
- Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
| | - Jean A Tkach
- Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Avenue, Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA
- Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Amol Pedneker
- Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Avenue, Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA
- Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | - Andrew T Trout
- Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Avenue, Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA
- Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Zou L, Zhang H, Wang Q, Zhong W, Du Y, Liu H, Xing W. Simultaneous liver steatosis, fibrosis and iron deposition quantification with mDixon quant based on radiomics analysis in a rabbit model. Magn Reson Imaging 2022; 94:36-42. [PMID: 35988836 DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2022.08.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2022] [Revised: 08/08/2022] [Accepted: 08/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate the feasibility of simultaneous quantification of liver fibrosis, liver steatosis and abnormal iron deposition using mDixon Quant based on radiomics analysis, and to eliminate the interference among different histopathologic features. METHODS One hundred and twenty rabbits that were administered CCl4 for 4-16 weeks and a cholesterol rich diet for the initial 4 weeks in the experimental group and 20 rabbits in the control group were examined using mDixon. Radiomics features of the whole liver were extracted from PDFF and R2* and radiomics models for discriminating steatosis: S0-S1 vs. S2-S4, fibrosis: F0-F2 vs. F3-F4 and iron deposition: normal vs. abnormal were constructed respectively and evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves with the histopathological results as reference standard. Combined corrected models merging the radscore and the other two histopathologic features were evaluated using multiple logistic regression analyses and compared with radiomics models. RESULTS The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the radiomics model with PDFF features was 0.886 and 0.843 in the training and the test set, respectively, for the diagnosis of liver steatosis grade S0-1 and S2-S4. The radiomics model based on R2* features were 0.815 and 0.801 for distinguishing F0-F2 and F3-F4 and 0.831 and 0.738 for discriminating abnormal iron deposition in the training and test set, respectively. The corrected model for liver steatosis and fibrosis (0.944 and 0.912 in the test set) outperformed the radiomics models by eliminating the interference of histopathologic features(P < 0.05), but had comparable diagnostic performance for abnormal iron deposition(P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS It is feasible for mDixon to simultaneously quantify whole liver steatosis, fibrosis and iron deposition based on radiomics analysis. It is valuable to minimize the interference of different pathological features for the assessment of liver steatosis and fibrosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- LiQiu Zou
- Department of Radiology, Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Hao Zhang
- Department of Radiology, Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, China
| | - Qing Wang
- Department of Radiology, Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu 213200, China
| | - WenXin Zhong
- Department of Radiology, Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, China
| | - YaNan Du
- Department of Radiology, Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu 213200, China
| | - HaiFeng Liu
- Department of Radiology, Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu 213200, China
| | - Wei Xing
- Department of Radiology, Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Changzhou, Jiangsu 213200, China.
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Amin K, Mileto A, Kolokythas O. MRI for Liver Iron Quantification: Concepts and Current Methods. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2022; 43:364-370. [PMID: 35738822 DOI: 10.1053/j.sult.2022.03.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
Liver Iron content is best correlated to total body iron stores and is thus the organ of choice for evaluation in iron overload diseases. Liver biopsy was the historic standard for iron evaluation, but the evaluation is localized, comes with increased risks due to its invasiveness, and is costly. MRI is now widely used for liver iron evaluation. The superparamagnetic properties of iron cause a disturbance in magnetic resonance imaging, which can be evaluated with various techniques. These include signal intensity ratio (SIR), T2 relaxometry, T2* relaxometry, and Dixon-based solutions. Each of the methods has its own advantages and disadvantages, and factors such as availability, ease of use, accuracy, reproducibility, and cost can all play a role in the ultimate technique used for liver iron quantification. Quantitative susceptibility mapping, and ultrashort TE sequences are promising supplemental methods, but are primarily used as research sequences. These may become more clinically accepted in the near future. Dual energy CT is also being explored as an alternative but is still in the nascent stages. Overall, accurate liver iron concentration is feasible with the current tools available at most MR imaging centers and is highly valuable for evaluation of iron overload diseases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathan Amin
- Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
| | - Achille Mileto
- Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | | |
Collapse
|
36
|
Welle CL, Olson MC, Reeder SB, Venkatesh SK. Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Liver Fibrosis, Fat, and Iron. Radiol Clin North Am 2022; 60:705-716. [PMID: 35989039 DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2022.04.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
|
37
|
Cao D, Li M, Liu Y, Jin H, Yang D, Xu H, Lv H, Liu JI, Zhang P, Zhang Z, Yang Z. Comparison of reader agreement, correlation with liver biopsy, and time-burden sampling strategies for liver proton density fat fraction measured using magnetic resonance imaging in patients with obesity: a secondary cross-sectional study. BMC Med Imaging 2022; 22:92. [PMID: 35581577 PMCID: PMC9112589 DOI: 10.1186/s12880-022-00821-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2021] [Accepted: 05/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based proton density fat fraction (PDFF) has become popular for quantifying liver fat content. However, the variability of the region-of-interest (ROI) sampling strategy may result in a lack of standardisation of this technology. In an effort to establish an accurate and effective PDFF measurement scheme, this study assessed the pathological correlation, the reader agreement, and time-burden of different sampling strategies with variable ROI size, location, and number. Methods Six-echo spoiled gradient-recalled-echo magnitude-based fat quantification was performed for 50 patients with obesity, using a 3.0-T MRI scanner. Two readers used different ROI sampling strategies to measure liver PDFF, three times. Intra-reader and inter-reader agreement was evaluated using intra-class correlation coefficients and Bland‒Altman analysis. Pearson correlations were used to assess the correlation between PDFFs and liver biopsy. Time-burden was recorded. Results For pathological correlations, the correlations for the strategy of using three large ROIs in Couinaud segment 3 (S3 3L-ROI) were significantly greater than those for all sampling strategies at the whole-liver level (P < 0.05). For inter-reader agreement, the sampling strategies at the segmental level for S3 3L-ROI and using three large ROIs in Couinaud segment 6 (S6 3L-ROI) and the sampling strategies at the whole-liver level for three small ROIs per Couinaud segment (27S-ROI), one large ROI per Couinaud segment (9L-ROI), and three large ROIs per Couinaud segment (27S-ROI) had limits of agreement (LOA) < 1.5%. For intra-reader agreement, the sampling strategies at the whole-liver level for 27S-ROI, 9L-ROI, and 27L-ROI had both intraclass coefficients > 0.995 and LOAs < 1.5%. The change in the time-burden was the largest (100.80 s) when 9L-ROI was changed to 27L-ROI. Conclusions For hepatic PDFF measurement without liver puncture biopsy as the gold standard, and for general hepatic PDFF assessment, 9L-ROI sampling strategy at the whole-liver level should be used preferentially. For hepatic PDFF with liver puncture biopsy as the gold standard, 3L-ROI sampling strategy at the puncture site segment is recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Di Cao
- Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 95 Yong-an Road, Xi-Cheng District, Beijing, 100050, China
| | - Mengyi Li
- Department of General Surgery, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University and National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases, No. 95 Yong-an Road, Xi-Cheng District, Beijing, 100050, China
| | - Yang Liu
- Department of General Surgery, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University and National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases, No. 95 Yong-an Road, Xi-Cheng District, Beijing, 100050, China
| | - He Jin
- Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 95 Yong-an Road, Xi-Cheng District, Beijing, 100050, China
| | - Dawei Yang
- Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 95 Yong-an Road, Xi-Cheng District, Beijing, 100050, China
| | - Hui Xu
- Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 95 Yong-an Road, Xi-Cheng District, Beijing, 100050, China
| | - Han Lv
- Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 95 Yong-an Road, Xi-Cheng District, Beijing, 100050, China
| | - JIa Liu
- Department of General Surgery, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University and National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases, No. 95 Yong-an Road, Xi-Cheng District, Beijing, 100050, China
| | - Peng Zhang
- Department of General Surgery, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University and National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases, No. 95 Yong-an Road, Xi-Cheng District, Beijing, 100050, China
| | - Zhongtao Zhang
- Department of General Surgery, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University and National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases, No. 95 Yong-an Road, Xi-Cheng District, Beijing, 100050, China.
| | - Zhenghan Yang
- Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, No. 95 Yong-an Road, Xi-Cheng District, Beijing, 100050, China.
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Starekova J, Zhao R, Colgan TJ, Johnson KM, Rehm JL, Wells SA, Reeder SB, Hernando D. Improved free-breathing liver fat and iron quantification using a 2D chemical shift–encoded MRI with flip angle modulation and motion-corrected averaging. Eur Radiol 2022; 32:5458-5467. [DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-08682-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2021] [Revised: 01/07/2022] [Accepted: 02/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
39
|
Roberts NT, Hernando D, Panagiotopoulos N, Reeder SB. Addressing concomitant gradient phase errors in time-interleaved chemical shift-encoded MRI fat fraction and R 2 * mapping with a pass-specific phase fitting method. Magn Reson Med 2022; 87:2826-2838. [PMID: 35122450 DOI: 10.1002/mrm.29175] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2021] [Revised: 01/07/2022] [Accepted: 01/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Concomitant gradients induce phase errors that increase quadratically with distance from isocenter. This work proposes a complex-based fitting method that addresses concomitant gradient phase errors in chemical shift encoded (CSE) MRI estimation of proton density fat fraction (PDFF) and R2 * through joint estimation of pass-specific phase terms. This method is applicable to time-interleaved multi-echo gradient-echo acquisitions (i.e., multi-pass acquisitions) and does not require prior knowledge of gradient waveforms typically needed to address concomitant gradient phase errors. THEORY AND METHODS A CSE-MRI spoiled gradient echo signal model, with pass-specific phase terms, is introduced for non-linear least squares estimation of PDFF and R2 * in the presence of concomitant gradient phase errors. Cramér-Rao lower bound analysis was used to determine noise performance tradeoffs of the proposed fitting method, which was then validated in both phantom and in vivo experiments. RESULTS The proposed fitting method removed PDFF and R2 * estimation errors up to 12% and 10 s-1 , respectively, at ±12 cm off isocenter (S/I) in a water phantom. In healthy volunteers, PDFF and R2 * bias was reduced by ~10% (12 cm off-isocenter) and ~30 s-1 (16 cm off-isocenter), respectively. An evaluation in 29 clinical liver datasets demonstrated reduced PDFF bias and variability (8.4% improvement in the coefficient of variation), even with the imaging volume centered at isocenter. CONCLUSION Concomitant gradient induced phase errors in multi-pass CSE-MRI acquisitions can result in PDFF and R2 * estimation biases away from isocenter. The proposed fitting method enables accurate PDFF and R2 * quantification in the presence of concomitant gradient phase errors without knowledge of imaging gradient waveforms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nathan T Roberts
- Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.,Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Diego Hernando
- Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.,Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.,Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.,Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | | | - Scott B Reeder
- Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.,Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.,Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.,Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.,Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Tokorodani R, Kume T, Daikoku K, Oka M. [Evaluation of the Validity of ROI Setting in CEI Used for the Assessment of Liver]. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 2022; 78:44-52. [PMID: 35046221 DOI: 10.6009/jjrt.780105] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The enhancement effect ratio using ethoxybenzyl (EOB) contrast is useful in the assessment of liver fibrosis. Since the enhancement effect ratio is calculated by setting a region of interest (ROI) in the liver, the ROI setting method may affect the enhancement effect ratio. One of the methods of setting the ROI in liver fibrosis evaluation is by placing the ROI in each Quinault segment, but this method requires considerable time. Therefore, it is necessary to consider a reproducible ROI setting method in contrast to the method of placing ROIs in each Quinault segment. METHOD In contrast to the method of placing one ROI in each Quinault segment, we examined the method of setting four ROIs (two in the right lobe and two in the left lobe) and two ROIs (one in the right lobe and one in the left lobe). The size of the ROI was set to 1 cm2, 4 cm2, and the maximum area that fits within each placement area. CONCLUSION In the ROI setting method for CEI calculation, reproducibility can be maintained by setting the number of ROIs in four locations and by setting ROIs of 4 cm2 or more.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ryotaro Tokorodani
- Division of Radiology, Department of Medical Technology, Kochi Medical School Hospital
| | - Toshiaki Kume
- Department of Radiological Technology, Kochi Health Sciences Center
| | - Kazuki Daikoku
- Division of Radiology, Department of Medical Technology, Kochi Medical School Hospital
| | - Masaki Oka
- Department of Radiological Technology, Kochi Health Sciences Center
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
The reliability of CT numbers as absolute values for diagnostic scanning, dental imaging, and radiation therapy simulation: A narrative review. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci 2021; 53:138-146. [PMID: 34911666 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmir.2021.11.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2021] [Revised: 11/14/2021] [Accepted: 11/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The purpose of this review was to examine the reported factors that affect the reliability of Computed Tomography (CT) numbers and their impact on clinical applications in diagnostic scanning, dental imaging, and radiation therapy dose calculation. METHODS A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted using Medline (PubMed), Google Scholar, and Ovid databases which were searched using the keywords CT number variability, CT number accuracy and uniformity, tube voltage, patient positioning, patient off-centring, and size dependence. A narrative summary was used to compile the findings under the overarching theme. DISCUSSION A total of 47 articles were identified to address the aim of this review. There is clear evidence that CT numbers are highly dependent on the energy level applied based on the effective atomic number of the scanned tissue. Furthermore, body size and anatomical location have also indicated an influence on measured CT numbers, especially for high-density materials such as bone tissue and dental implants. Patient off-centring was reported during CT imaging, affecting dose and CT number reliability, which was demonstrated to be dependent on the shaping filter size. CONCLUSION CT number accuracy for all energy levels, body sizes, anatomical locations, and degrees of patient off-centring is observed to be a variable under certain common conditions. This has significant implications for several clinical applications. It is crucial for those involved in CT imaging to understand the limitations of their CT system to ensure radiologists and operators avoid potential pitfalls associated with using CT numbers as absolute values for diagnostic scanning, dental imaging, and radiation therapy dose calculation.
Collapse
|
42
|
Shibutani K, Okada M, Tsukada J, Hyodo T, Ibukuro K, Abe H, Matsumoto N, Midorikawa Y, Moriyama M, Takayama T. A proposed model on MR elastography for predicting postoperative major complications in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. BJR Open 2021; 3:20210019. [PMID: 34877453 PMCID: PMC8611681 DOI: 10.1259/bjro.20210019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2021] [Revised: 08/27/2021] [Accepted: 09/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective To develop a model for predicting post-operative major complications in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods In all, 186 consecutive patients with pre-operative MR elastography were included. Complications were categorised using Clavien‒Dindo classification, with major complications defined as ≥Grade 3. Liver-stiffness measurement (LSM) values were measured on elastogram. The indocyanine green clearance rate of liver remnant (ICG-Krem) was based on the results of CT volumetry, intraoperative data, and ICG-K value. For an easy application to the prediction model, the continuous variables were converted to categories. Moreover, logistic regression analysis and fivefold cross-validation were performed. The prediction model's discriminative performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and the calibration of the model was assessed by the Hosmer‒Lemeshow test. Results 43 of 186 patients (23.1%) had major complications. The multivariate analysis demonstrated that LSM, albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) score, intraoperative blood loss, and ICG-Krem were significantly associated with major complications. The median AUC of the five validation subsets was 0.878. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test confirmed no evidence of inadequate fit (p = 0.13, 0.19, 0.59, 0.59, and 0.73) on the fivefold cross-validation. The prediction model for major complications was as follows: -2.876 + 2.912 [LSM (>5.3 kPa)]+1.538 [ALBI score (>-2.28)]+0.531 [Intraoperative blood loss (>860 ml)]+0.257 [ICG-Krem (<0.10)]. Conclusion The proposed prediction model can be used to predict post-operative major complications in patients with HCC. Advances in knowledge The proposed prediction model can be used in routine clinical practice to identify post-operative major complications in patients with HCC and to strategise appropriate treatments of HCC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kazu Shibutani
- Department of Radiology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Masahiro Okada
- Department of Radiology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Jitsuro Tsukada
- Department of Radiology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tomoko Hyodo
- Department of Radiology, Kindai University school of medicine, Osaka, Japan
| | - Kenji Ibukuro
- Department of Radiology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Hayato Abe
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Naoki Matsumoto
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yutaka Midorikawa
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Mitsuhiko Moriyama
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tadatoshi Takayama
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Garteiser P, Castera L, Coupaye M, Doblas S, Calabrese D, Dioguardi Burgio M, Ledoux S, Bedossa P, Esposito-Farèse M, Msika S, Van Beers BE, Jouët P. Prospective comparison of transient elastography, MRI and serum scores for grading steatosis and detecting non-alcoholic steatohepatitis in bariatric surgery candidates. JHEP Rep 2021; 3:100381. [PMID: 34786549 PMCID: PMC8578045 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2021.100381] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/26/2020] [Revised: 08/27/2021] [Accepted: 09/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background & Aims Tools for the non-invasive diagnosis of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) in morbidly obese patients with suspected non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) are an unmet clinical need. We prospectively compared the performance of transient elastography, MRI, and 3 serum scores for the diagnosis of NAFLD, grading of steatosis and detection of NASH in bariatric surgery candidates. Methods Of 186 patients screened, 152 underwent liver biopsy, which was used as a reference for NAFLD (steatosis [S]>5%), steatosis grading and NASH diagnosis. Biopsies were read by a single expert pathologist. MRI-based proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) was measured in an open-bore, vertical field 1.0T scanner and controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) was measured by transient elastography, using the XL probe. Serum scores (SteatoTest, hepatic steatosis index and fatty liver index) were also calculated. Results The applicability of MRI was better than that of FibroScan (98% vs. 79%; p <0.0001). CAP had AUROCs of 0.83, 0.79, 0.73 and 0.69 for S>5%, S>33%, S>66% and NASH, respectively. Transient elastography had an AUROC of 0.80 for significant fibrosis (F0-F1 vs. F2-F3). MRI-PDFF had AUROCs of 0.97, 0.95, 0.92 and 0.84 for S>5%, S>33%, S>66% and NASH, respectively. When compared head-to-head in the 97 patients with all valid tests available, MRI-PDFF outperformed CAP for grading steatosis (S>33%, AUROC 0.97 vs. 0.78; p <0.0003 and S>66%, AUROC 0.93 vs. 0.75; p = 0.0015) and diagnosing NASH (AUROC 0.82 vs. 0.68; p = 0.0056). When compared in "intention to diagnose" analysis, MRI-PDFF outperformed CAP, hepatic steatosis index and fatty liver index for grading steatosis (S>5%, S>33% and S>66%). Conclusion MRI-PDFF outperforms CAP for diagnosing NAFLD, grading steatosis and excluding NASH in morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Lay summary Non-invasive tests for detecting fatty liver and steatohepatitis, the active form of the disease, have not been well studied in obese patients who are candidates for bariatric surgery. The most popular tests for this purpose are Fibroscan, which can be used to measure the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP), and magnetic resonance imaging, which can be used to measure the proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF). We found that, when taking liver biopsy as a reference, MRI-PDFF performed better than CAP for detecting and grading fatty liver as well as excluding steatohepatitis in morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery.
Collapse
Key Words
- AUROC, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve
- CAP
- CAP, controlled attenuation parameter
- FLI, fatty liver index
- FLIP, fatty liver inhibition of progression
- HSI, hepatic steatosis index
- LSM, liver stiffness measurement
- MRI-PDFF
- MRI-PDFF, MRI-proton density fat fraction
- NAFLD
- NAFLD, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease
- NAS, NAFLD activity score
- NASH
- NASH, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis
- NPV, negative predictive value
- Non-invasive diagnosis
- PPV, positive predictive value
- ST, SteatoTest
- Se, sensitivity
- Sp, specificity
- TE, transient elastography
- bariatric surgery
- steatosis
- transient elastography
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philippe Garteiser
- Centre de recherche sur l'Inflammation, Inserm U1149, Université de Paris, F-75018 Paris, France
| | - Laurent Castera
- Centre de recherche sur l'Inflammation, Inserm U1149, Université de Paris, F-75018 Paris, France.,Service d'Hépatologie, Hôpital Beaujon, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, F-92110 Clichy, France
| | - Muriel Coupaye
- Centre de recherche sur l'Inflammation, Inserm U1149, Université de Paris, F-75018 Paris, France.,Service des Explorations Fonctionnelles, Centre Intégré Nord Francilien de l'Obésité (CINFO), Hôpital Louis Mourier, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, F-92700 Colombes, France
| | - Sabrina Doblas
- Centre de recherche sur l'Inflammation, Inserm U1149, Université de Paris, F-75018 Paris, France
| | - Daniela Calabrese
- Centre de recherche sur l'Inflammation, Inserm U1149, Université de Paris, F-75018 Paris, France.,Service de chirurgie digestive, Centre Intégré Nord Francilien de l'Obésité (CINFO), Hôpital Bichat-Claude Bernard, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, F-75018 Paris, France
| | - Marco Dioguardi Burgio
- Centre de recherche sur l'Inflammation, Inserm U1149, Université de Paris, F-75018 Paris, France.,Service de Radiologie, Hôpital Beaujon, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, F-92110 Clichy, France
| | - Séverine Ledoux
- Centre de recherche sur l'Inflammation, Inserm U1149, Université de Paris, F-75018 Paris, France.,Service des Explorations Fonctionnelles, Centre Intégré Nord Francilien de l'Obésité (CINFO), Hôpital Louis Mourier, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, F-92700 Colombes, France
| | - Pierre Bedossa
- Centre de recherche sur l'Inflammation, Inserm U1149, Université de Paris, F-75018 Paris, France.,Service de Pathologie, Hôpital Beaujon, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, F-92110 Clichy, France
| | - Marina Esposito-Farèse
- Unité de Recherche Clinique, Hôpital Bichat, AP-HP.Nord - Université de Paris, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, F-75018, France.,INSERM CIC-EC 1425, Centre d'Investigation Clinique, Hôpital Bichat, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, F-75018, France
| | - Simon Msika
- Centre de recherche sur l'Inflammation, Inserm U1149, Université de Paris, F-75018 Paris, France.,Service de chirurgie digestive, Centre Intégré Nord Francilien de l'Obésité (CINFO), Hôpital Bichat-Claude Bernard, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, F-75018 Paris, France
| | - Bernard E Van Beers
- Centre de recherche sur l'Inflammation, Inserm U1149, Université de Paris, F-75018 Paris, France.,Service de Radiologie, Hôpital Beaujon, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, F-92110 Clichy, France
| | - Pauline Jouët
- Service de Gastroentérologie, Hôpital Avicenne, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, F-93000 Bobigny, France
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Martí-Aguado D, Jiménez-Pastor A, Alberich-Bayarri Á, Rodríguez-Ortega A, Alfaro-Cervello C, Mestre-Alagarda C, Bauza M, Gallén-Peris A, Valero-Pérez E, Ballester MP, Gimeno-Torres M, Pérez-Girbés A, Benlloch S, Pérez-Rojas J, Puglia V, Ferrández A, Aguilera V, Escudero-García D, Serra MA, Martí-Bonmatí L. Automated Whole-Liver MRI Segmentation to Assess Steatosis and Iron Quantification in Chronic Liver Disease. Radiology 2021; 302:345-354. [PMID: 34783592 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2021211027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Background Standardized manual region of interest (ROI) sampling strategies for hepatic MRI steatosis and iron quantification are time consuming, with variable results. Purpose To evaluate the performance of automatic MRI whole-liver segmentation (WLS) for proton density fat fraction (PDFF) and iron estimation (transverse relaxometry [R2*]) versus manual ROI, with liver biopsy as the reference standard. Materials and Methods This prospective, cross-sectional, multicenter study recruited participants with chronic liver disease who underwent liver biopsy and chemical shift-encoded 3.0-T MRI between January 2017 and January 2021. Biopsy evaluation included histologic grading and digital pathology. MRI liver sampling strategies included manual ROI (two observers) and automatic whole-liver (deep learning algorithm) segmentation for PDFF- and R2*-derived measurements. Agreements between segmentation methods were measured using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and biases were evaluated using Bland-Altman analyses. Linear regression analyses were performed to determine the correlation between measurements and digital pathology. Results A total of 165 participants were included (mean age ± standard deviation, 55 years ± 12; 96 women; 101 of 165 participants [61%] with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease). Agreements between mean measurements were excellent, with ICCs of 0.98 for both PDFF and R2*. The median bias was 0.5% (interquartile range, -0.4% to 1.2%) for PDFF and 2.7 sec-1 (interquartile range, 0.2-5.3 sec-1) for R2* (P < .001 for both). Margins of error were lower for WLS than ROI-derived parameters (-0.03% for PDFF and -0.3 sec-1 for R2*). ROI and WLS showed similar performance for steatosis (ROI AUC, 0.96; WLS AUC, 0.97; P = .53) and iron overload (ROI AUC, 0.85; WLS AUC, 0.83; P = .09). Correlations with digital pathology were high (P < .001) between the fat ratio and PDFF (ROI r = 0.89; WLS r = 0.90) and moderate (P < .001) between the iron ratio and R2* (ROI r = 0.65; WLS r = 0.64). Conclusion Proton density fat fraction and transverse relaxometry measurements derived from MRI automatic whole-liver segmentation (WLS) were accurate for steatosis and iron grading in chronic liver disease and correlated with digital pathology. Automated WLS estimations were higher, with a lower margin of error than manual region of interest estimations. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Moura Cunha and Fowler in this issue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Martí-Aguado
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Ana Jiménez-Pastor
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Ángel Alberich-Bayarri
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Alejandro Rodríguez-Ortega
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Clara Alfaro-Cervello
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Claudia Mestre-Alagarda
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Mónica Bauza
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Ana Gallén-Peris
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Elena Valero-Pérez
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - María Pilar Ballester
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Marta Gimeno-Torres
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Alexandre Pérez-Girbés
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Salvador Benlloch
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Judith Pérez-Rojas
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Víctor Puglia
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Antonio Ferrández
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Victoria Aguilera
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Desamparados Escudero-García
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Miguel A Serra
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| | - Luis Martí-Bonmatí
- From the Departments of Digestive Diseases (D.M.A., M.P.B., D.E.G.), Pathology (C.A.C., C.M.A., A.F.), and Gastroenterology and Hepatology (D.M.A.), Clinic University Hospital, INCLIVA Health Research Institute, Avenida Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010 Valencia, Spain; Biomedical Imaging Research Group (GIBI2), La Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain (D.M.A., A.R.O., L.M.B.); Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers in Medicine, Quibim SL, Valencia, Spain (A.J.P., Á.A.B.); University of Valencia, Faculty of Medicine, Valencia, Spain (C.A.C., A.F., D.E.G., M.A.S.); Departments of Pathology (M.B., J.P.R.), Digestive Diseases (E.V.P., M.G.T.), and Radiology (A.P.G., L.M.B.) and the Hepatology and Liver Transplantation Unit (V.A.), La Fe University and Polytechnic Hospital, Valencia, Spain; Departments of Digestive Diseases (A.G.P., S.B.) and Pathology (V.P.), Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Valencia, Spain; CIBERehd (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red en Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (S.B., V.A.); and Río Hortega, Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain (D.M.A.)
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Audière S, Labourdette A, Miette V, Fournier C, Ternifi R, Boussida S, Pouletaut P, Charleux F, Bensamoun SF, Harrison SA, Sandrin L. Improved Ultrasound Attenuation Measurement Method for the Non-invasive Evaluation of Hepatic Steatosis Using FibroScan. ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE & BIOLOGY 2021; 47:3181-3195. [PMID: 34373137 DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2021.07.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2021] [Revised: 06/24/2021] [Accepted: 07/13/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
Controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) is a measurement of ultrasound attenuation used to assess liver steatosis non-invasively. However, the standard method has some limitations. This study assessed the performance of a new CAP method by ex vivo and in vivo assessments. The major difference with the new method is that it uses ultrasound data continuously acquired during the imaging phase of the FibroScan examination. Seven reference tissue-mimicking phantoms were used to test the performance. In vivo performance was assessed in two cohorts (in total 195 patients) of patients using magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) as a reference. The precision of CAP was improved by more than 50% on tissue-mimicking phantoms and 22%-41% in the in vivo cohort studies. The agreement between both methods was excellent, and the correlation between CAP and MRI-PDFF improved in both studies (0.71 to 0.74; 0.70 to 0.76). Using MRI-PDFF as a reference, the diagnostic performance of the new method was at least equal or superior (area under the receiver operating curve 0.889-0.900, 0.835-0.873). This study suggests that the new continuous CAP method can significantly improve the precision of CAP measurements ex vivo and in vivo.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Redouane Ternifi
- Université de technologie de Compiègne, CNRS, Biomechanics and Bioengineering, Centre de recherche Royallieu, Compiègne, France
| | - Salem Boussida
- Université de technologie de Compiègne, CNRS, Biomechanics and Bioengineering, Centre de recherche Royallieu, Compiègne, France
| | - Philippe Pouletaut
- Université de technologie de Compiègne, CNRS, Biomechanics and Bioengineering, Centre de recherche Royallieu, Compiègne, France
| | - Fabrice Charleux
- ACRIM-Polyclinique Saint Côme, Medical Radiology, Compiègne, France
| | - Sabine F Bensamoun
- Université de technologie de Compiègne, CNRS, Biomechanics and Bioengineering, Centre de recherche Royallieu, Compiègne, France
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Starekova J, Hernando D, Pickhardt PJ, Reeder SB. Quantification of Liver Fat Content with CT and MRI: State of the Art. Radiology 2021; 301:250-262. [PMID: 34546125 PMCID: PMC8574059 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2021204288] [Citation(s) in RCA: 132] [Impact Index Per Article: 33.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/13/2020] [Revised: 04/19/2021] [Accepted: 04/26/2021] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Hepatic steatosis is defined as pathologically elevated liver fat content and has many underlying causes. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most common chronic liver disease worldwide, with an increasing prevalence among adults and children. Abnormal liver fat accumulation has serious consequences, including cirrhosis, liver failure, and hepatocellular carcinoma. In addition, hepatic steatosis is increasingly recognized as an independent risk factor for the metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes, and, most important, cardiovascular mortality. During the past 2 decades, noninvasive imaging-based methods for the evaluation of hepatic steatosis have been developed and disseminated. Chemical shift-encoded MRI is now established as the most accurate and precise method for liver fat quantification. CT is important for the detection and quantification of incidental steatosis and may play an increasingly prominent role in risk stratification, particularly with the emergence of CT-based screening and artificial intelligence. Quantitative imaging methods are increasingly used for diagnostic work-up and management of steatosis, including treatment monitoring. The purpose of this state-of-the-art review is to provide an overview of recent progress and current state of the art for liver fat quantification using CT and MRI, as well as important practical considerations related to clinical implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jitka Starekova
- From the Departments of Radiology (J.S., D.H., P.J.P., S.B.R.),
Medical Physics (D.H., S.B.R.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine
(S.B.R.), and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, 1111
Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Diego Hernando
- From the Departments of Radiology (J.S., D.H., P.J.P., S.B.R.),
Medical Physics (D.H., S.B.R.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine
(S.B.R.), and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, 1111
Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Perry J. Pickhardt
- From the Departments of Radiology (J.S., D.H., P.J.P., S.B.R.),
Medical Physics (D.H., S.B.R.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine
(S.B.R.), and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, 1111
Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Scott B. Reeder
- From the Departments of Radiology (J.S., D.H., P.J.P., S.B.R.),
Medical Physics (D.H., S.B.R.), Biomedical Engineering (S.B.R.), Medicine
(S.B.R.), and Emergency Medicine (S.B.R.), University of Wisconsin, 1111
Highland Ave, Madison, WI 53705
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Colgan TJ, Zhao R, Roberts NT, Hernando D, Reeder SB. Limits of Fat Quantification in the Presence of Iron Overload. J Magn Reson Imaging 2021; 54:1166-1174. [PMID: 33783066 PMCID: PMC8440489 DOI: 10.1002/jmri.27611] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2020] [Revised: 03/09/2021] [Accepted: 03/10/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Chemical shift encoded magnetic resonance imaging (CSE-MRI)-based tissue fat quantification is confounded by increased R2* signal decay rate caused by the presence of excess iron deposition. PURPOSE To determine the upper limit of R2* above which it is no longer feasible to quantify proton density fat fraction (PDFF) reliably, using CSE-MRI. STUDY TYPE Prospective. POPULATION Cramér-Rao lower bound (CRLB) calculations, Monte Carlo simulations, phantom experiments, and a prospective study in 26 patients with known or suspected liver iron overload. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE Multiecho gradient echo at 1.5 T and 3.0 T. ASSESSMENT CRLB calculations were used to develop an empirical relationship between the maximum R2* value above which PDFF estimation will achieve a desired number of effective signal averages. A single voxel multi-TR, multi-TE stimulated echo acquisition mode magnetic resonance spectroscopy acquisition was used as a reference standard to estimate PDFF. Reconstructed PDFF and R2* maps were analyzed by one analyst using multiple regions of interest drawn in all nine Couinaud segments. STATISTICAL TESTS None. RESULTS Simulations, phantom experiments, and in vivo measurements demonstrated unreliable PDFF estimates with increased R2*, with PDFF errors as large as 20% at an R2* of 1000 s-1 . For typical optimized Cartesian acquisitions (TE1 = 0.75 msec, ΔTE = 0.67 msec at 1.5 T, TE1 = 0.65 msec, ΔTE = 0.58 msec at 3.0 T), an empirical relationship between PDFF estimation errors and acquisition parameters was developed that suggests PDFF estimates are unreliable above an R2* of ~538 s-1 and ~779 s-1 at 1.5 T and 3 T, respectively. This empirical relationship was further investigated with phantom experiments and in vivo measurements, with PDFF errors at an R2* of 1000 s-1 at 3.0 T as large as 10% with TE1 = 1.24 msec, ΔTE = 1.01 msec compared to 3% with TE1 = 0.65 msec, ΔTE = 0.58 msec. DATA CONCLUSION We successfully developed a theoretically-based empirical formula that may provide an easily calculable guideline to identify R2* values above which PDFF is not reliable in research and clinical applications using CSE-MRI to quantify PDFF in the presence of iron overload. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 1.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy J Colgan
- Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Ruiyang Zhao
- Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Nathan T Roberts
- Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Diego Hernando
- Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Scott B Reeder
- Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Watt KD, Heimbach JK, Rizk M, Jaruvongvanich P, Sanchez W, Port J, Venkatesh SK, Bamlet H, Tiedtke K, Malhi H, Acosta Cardenas A, Grothe K, Clark M, Mundi MS, Abu Dayyeh BK. Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Balloon Placement for Weight Loss in Patients With Cirrhosis Awaiting Liver Transplantation. Liver Transpl 2021; 27:1239-1247. [PMID: 33866660 DOI: 10.1002/lt.26074] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2021] [Revised: 03/25/2021] [Accepted: 04/02/2021] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
The efficacy and safety of a fluid-filled intragastric balloon (IGB) for weight loss in patients with cirrhosis on the liver transplantation (LT) waiting list is unknown. We enrolled stable compensated patients with body mass index >35 kg/m2 and on the waiting list for IGB placement endoscopically for a maximum of 6 months. A total of 8 patients (7 men) aged mean ± SD, 56 ± 4.6 years with Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-sodium (MELD-Na) scores 14.1 ± 3.4 experienced weight reduction (146 ± 22.2 kg versus 127 ± 21.6 kg [P = 0.005] with IGB in place and 130 ± 24.6 kg [P = 0.014] at 6 months), with a total body weight loss of 12.2% ± 8.8% with IGBs in place and 10.9% ± 8.9% at 6 months. Body fat decreased from 48.6% ± 5.8% to 40.6% ± 6.4% (P = 0.001) and lean mass increased from 51.3% ± 6% to 59.4% ± 6.4% (P = 0.001). No change in MELD-Na scores occurred (P = 0.770). Early balloon retrieval was attributed to accommodative symptoms (n = 2) and liver decompensation (n = 1). Mallory Weiss tears (n = 3), but no portal hypertensive bleeding, occurred. Liver decompensation and/or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) developed in 3 patients. A total of 4 patients with LT ± sleeve gastrectomy maintained overall weight loss. Of 4 patients who did not receive transplants, 2 experienced weight regain. IGB results in short-term weight loss in patients with cirrhosis awaiting LT, with body fat loss without lean mass loss. Adverse effects were common. Decompensation and HCC did occur, with uncertainty of the relation to weight loss, and thus careful patient selection and close follow-up are required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kymberly D Watt
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | - Monika Rizk
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | - William Sanchez
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - John Port
- Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | - Heather Bamlet
- Department of Clinical Nutrition, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Kathryn Tiedtke
- Department of Clinical Nutrition, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Harmeet Malhi
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | - Karen Grothe
- Department of Psychology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Matthew Clark
- Department of Psychology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
49
|
Hong CW, Cui JY, Batakis D, Xu Y, Wolfson T, Gamst AC, Schlein AN, Negrete LM, Middleton MS, Hamilton G, Loomba R, Schwimmer JB, Fowler KJ, Sirlin CB. Repeatability and accuracy of various region-of-interest sampling strategies for hepatic MRI proton density fat fraction quantification. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2021; 46:3105-3116. [PMID: 33609166 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-021-02965-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2020] [Revised: 01/13/2021] [Accepted: 01/16/2021] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To evaluate repeatability of ROI-sampling strategies for quantifying hepatic proton density fat fraction (PDFF) and to assess error relative to the 9-ROI PDFF. METHODS This was a secondary analysis in subjects with known or suspected nonalcoholic fatty liver disease who underwent MRI for magnitude-based hepatic PDFF quantification. Each subject underwent three exams, each including three acquisitions (nine acquisitions total). An ROI was placed in each hepatic segment on the first acquisition of the first exam and propagated to other acquisitions. PDFF was calculated for each of 511 sampling strategies using every combination of 1, 2, …, all 9 ROIs. Intra- and inter-exam intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) and repeatability coefficients (RCs) were estimated for each sampling strategy. Mean absolute error (MAE) was estimated relative to the 9-ROI PDFF. Strategies that sampled both lobes evenly ("balanced") were compared with those that did not ("unbalanced") using two-sample t tests. RESULTS The 29 enrolled subjects (23 male, mean age 24 years) had mean 9-ROI PDFF 11.8% (1.1-36.3%). With more ROIs, ICCs increased, RCs decreased, and MAE decreased. Of the 60 balanced strategies with 4 ROIs, all (100%) achieved inter- and intra-exam ICCs > 0.998, 55 (92%) achieved intra-exam RC < 1%, 50 (83%) achieved inter-exam RC < 1%, and all (100%) achieved MAE < 1%. Balanced sampling strategies had higher ICCs and lower RCs, and lower MAEs than unbalanced strategies in aggregate (p < 0.001 for comparisons between balanced vs. unbalanced strategies). CONCLUSION Repeatability improves and error diminishes with more ROIs. Balanced 4-ROI strategies provide high repeatability and low error.
Collapse
|
50
|
Predictive value of combined computed tomography volumetry and magnetic resonance elastography for major complications after liver resection. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2021; 46:3193-3204. [PMID: 33683428 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-021-02991-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/04/2020] [Revised: 02/01/2021] [Accepted: 02/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To retrospectively compare the predictive value of computed tomography volumetry (CTV), magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) of the liver, and their combination for major complications after liver resection. METHODS We enrolled 108 consecutive patients who underwent anatomical liver resection for liver tumors and preoperative contrast-enhanced CT and MRE. The future liver remnant (FLR) ratio was calculated by CTV, while the liver stiffness measurement (LSM) was obtained by MRE. FLR ratio alone, LSM alone, and combined FLR ratio and LSM were evaluated to predict major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ IIIa). Univariate and multivariate analyses of hepatic biochemical parameters and imaging data were performed to identify predictors of major complications. Receiver operating characteristic analyses of FLR ratio, LSM, and their combination were performed, and the sensitivity and specificity were calculated. RESULTS Twenty-two (20.4%) of the 108 patients experienced major complications. According to multiple regression analysis, the FLR ratio (odds ratio [OR] 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91-0.99, p = 0.040) and LSM (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.01-2.94, p = 0.047) were independent predictors of major complications. The combined FLR ratio and LSM were predictive of major complications, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.818, sensitivity of 68.2%, and specificity of 84.9%. The AUC and specificity for combined FLR ratio and LSM were larger than those for FLR ratio (AUC: 0.711, specificity: 80.2%) and LSM (AUC: 0.793, specificity: 80.2%). CONCLUSION Combined CTV and MRE analysis can improve the AUC and specificity for predicting major complications after anatomical liver resection.
Collapse
|