European journal of radiology · 2019
Liver MRI susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) compared to T2* mapping in the presence of steatosis and fibrosis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Obmann Verena C, Marx Christina, Berzigotti Annalisa, Mertineit Nando, Hrycyk Joris, Gräni Christoph, Ebner Lukas, Ith Michael, Heverhagen Johannes T, Christe Andreas, Huber Adrian T
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To show that both susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) and T2*-mapping are dependent on liver steatosis, which should be taken into account when using these parameters to grade liver fibrosis and cirrhosis.
METHODS: In this prospective study, a total of 174 patients without focal liver disease underwent multiparametric MRI at 3 T including SWI, T1- and T2* mapping, proton density fat fraction (PDFF) quantification and MR elastography. SWI, T2* and T1 were measured in the liver (4 locations), as well as in paraspinal muscles, to calculate the liver-to-muscle ratio (LMR). Liver and LMR values were compared among patients with different steatosis grades (PDFF < 5%, 5-10%, 10-20% and >20%), patients with normal, slightly increased and increased liver stiffness (<2.8 kPa, 2.8-3.5 kPa and >3.5 kPa, respectively). ANOVA with Bonferroni-corrected post hoc tests as well as a multivariate analysis were used to compare values among groups and parameters.
RESULTS: SWI and T2* both differed significantly among groups with different steatosis grades (p < 0.001). However, SWI allowed a better differentiation among liver fibrosis grades (p < 0.001) than did T2* (p = 0.05). SWI LMR (p < 0.001) and T2* LMR (p = 0.036) showed a similar performance in differentiating among liver fibrosis grades.
CONCLUSION: SWI and T2*-mapping are strongly dependent on the liver steatosis grades. Nevertheless, both parameters are useful predictors for liver fibrosis when using a multiparametric approach.
METHODS: In this prospective study, a total of 174 patients without focal liver disease underwent multiparametric MRI at 3 T including SWI, T1- and T2* mapping, proton density fat fraction (PDFF) quantification and MR elastography. SWI, T2* and T1 were measured in the liver (4 locations), as well as in paraspinal muscles, to calculate the liver-to-muscle ratio (LMR). Liver and LMR values were compared among patients with different steatosis grades (PDFF < 5%, 5-10%, 10-20% and >20%), patients with normal, slightly increased and increased liver stiffness (<2.8 kPa, 2.8-3.5 kPa and >3.5 kPa, respectively). ANOVA with Bonferroni-corrected post hoc tests as well as a multivariate analysis were used to compare values among groups and parameters.
RESULTS: SWI and T2* both differed significantly among groups with different steatosis grades (p < 0.001). However, SWI allowed a better differentiation among liver fibrosis grades (p < 0.001) than did T2* (p = 0.05). SWI LMR (p < 0.001) and T2* LMR (p = 0.036) showed a similar performance in differentiating among liver fibrosis grades.
CONCLUSION: SWI and T2*-mapping are strongly dependent on the liver steatosis grades. Nevertheless, both parameters are useful predictors for liver fibrosis when using a multiparametric approach.