Purpose To investigate the cause of imaging artifacts observed during gadoxetic acid–enhanced arterial phase imaging of the liver. Materials and Methods This HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board. Data were collected prospectively at two sites (site A, United States; site B, Japan) from patients undergoing contrast material–enhanced MR imaging with gadoxetic acid (site A, n = 154, dose = 0.05 mmol/kg; site B, n = 130, 0.025 mmol/kg) or gadobenate dimeglumine (only site A, n = 1666) from January 2014 to September 2014 at site A and from November 2014 to January 2015 at site B. Detailed comparisons between the two agents were made in the patients with dynamic liver acquisitions (n = 372) and age-, sex-, and baseline oxygen saturation (Spo2)-matched pairs (n = 130) at site A. Acquired data included self-reported dyspnea after contrast agent injection, Spo2, and breath-hold fidelity monitored with respiratory bellows. Results Self-reported dyspnea was more frequent with gadoxetic acid than with gadobenate dimeglumine (site A, 6.5% [10 of 154] vs 0.1% [two of 1666], P < .001; site B, 1.5% [two of 130]). In the matched-pair comparison, gadoxetic acid, as compared with gadobenate dimeglumine, had higher breath-hold failure rates (site A, 34.6% [45 of 130] vs 11.7% [15 of 130], P < .0001; site B, 16.2% [21 of 130]) and more severe artifacts during arterial phase imaging (site A, 7.7% [10 of 130] vs 0% [none of 130], P < .001; site B, 2.3% [three of 130]). Severe imaging artifacts in patients who received gadoxetic acid were significantly associated with male sex (P = .023), body mass index (P = .021), and breath-hold failure (P < .001) but not with dyspnea or Spo2 decrease. Conclusion Severe motion-related artifacts in the arterial phase of gadoxetic acid–enhanced liver MR imaging are associated with breath-hold failure but not with subjective feelings of dyspnea or a substantial decrease in blood Spo2. Subjective feelings of dyspnea are not necessarily associated with imaging artifacts. The phenomenon, albeit at a lower rate, was confirmed at a second site in Japan.
OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reproducibility (interreviewer agreement) and repeatability (intrareviewer agreement) of ROI sampling strategies to measure chemical shift–encoded (CSE) MRI-based liver proton density fat fraction (PDFF) and R2* (1 / T2*). A secondary purpose was to standardize ROI-based liver PDFF and R2* measurements by providing a compromise between measurement reproducibility and repeatability and time burden for image analysts. MATERIALS AND METHODS CSE data from two cohorts were retrospectively analyzed. Cohort A included 53 patients referred for abdominal MRI and healthy subjects recruited for a comparison study of CT and MRI. Cohort B included 37 patients with suspected liver iron overload. Three reviewers measured liver PDFF and R2* using previously reported ROI sampling strategies. Inter- and intrareviewer agreement of liver PDFF and R2* were evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS Averaging largest-fit ROIs over the nine Couinaud segments resulted in the narrowest limits of agreement (LOA) for liver PDFF and R2* measurements in both cohorts. For PDFF, interreviewer agreement had mean LOA of ± 0.8% for cohort A and ± 1.7% for cohort B. Intrareviewer agreement was ± 0.5% for cohort A and ± 0.9% for cohort B. For R2* interreviewer agreement had mean LOA of ± 3.0 s−1 for cohort A and ± 17.9 s−1 for cohort B. Intrareviewer agreement was ± 2.6 s−1 for cohort A and ± 14.6 s−1 for cohort B. This approach was the most time-burdensome, requiring a mean ± SD of 149.7 ± 8.6 s per dataset. CONCLUSION For improved reproducibility and repeatability of liver PDFF and R2* measurements, clinicians and researchers should sample as much area of the liver as possible using multiple large ROIs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.