Liver MRI susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) compared to T2* mapping in the presence of steatosis and fibrosis

Obmann, Verena Carola; Marx, Christina Lynn; Berzigotti, Annalisa; Mertineit, Nando; Hrycyk, Joris; Gräni, Christoph; Ebner, Lukas; Ith, Michael; Heverhagen, Johannes T.; Christe, Andreas; Huber, Adrian Thomas

doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.07.001

Cited by 17 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Multiparametric MRI refers to use of multiple quantitative (parametric) MRI features or measures with several possibilities for combinations [34][35][36][40][41][42][43][44][45]. Therefore, these combinations could be used to evaluate two or more specific characteristics of chronic liver disease and diffuse liver processes, to include derivation of composite metrics [44,46].…”

Section: Mpmri Methods In Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…We will limit this review to parametric MRI techniques in clinical decision-making for chronic liver disease that are available to the practicing radiologist. For example, T1rho is an exciting approach that explores a relaxation due to low frequency (kHz) exchange interactions and may find utility once it has been validated and deployed at scale [47], SWI (susceptibility weighted imaging) provides an approach for measuring local magnetic susceptibility that can assess fibrosis [41] and has been shown to be affected by iron, fat and collagen deposition [41,48,49]. Developments utilising contrast agents are not included, as these have been reviewed recently elsewhere [50] and are mainly used in characterisation of hepatocellular lesions and carcinomas.…”

Section: Mpmri Methods In Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…9.2–11.5% across field strengths (Siemens) [ 189 ]. Variability in mechanical waves used (40 Hz, 50 Hz, 60 Hz) [ 82 ] Diagnosis of iron overload High sensitivity (0.85–0.94) and specificity (0.92–1.00) for wide range of liver iron concentrations [ 52 , 190 ] T2* AUROC for stainable iron: 0.79–0.94 [ 16 , 28 ] No, a confounder that can be overcome by T2* or SE-EPI sequences [ 35 , 89 , 90 ] Diagnosis of NASH and disease activity Not applicable cT1 AUROC for NASH: 0.69–0.72 [ 85 , 102 ] cT1 AUROC for NAFLD: 0.93 [ 102 ] cT1 AUROC for ballooning: 0.84 [adapted from [ 32 ]] cT1 AUROC for NAS ≥ 5: 0.74 [ 102 ] AUROC for NASH: 0.58 [ 85 ] Diagnosis of steatosis Volumetric fat fraction of liver tissue (% fat) rather than PDFF available as HepaFatScan PDFF AUROC for steatosis grades: ≥ G1: 0.93 [ 85 ] ≥ G2: 0.96 [ 85 ] ≥ G3: 0.94 [ 85 ] Not applicable but can add PDFF [ 36 , 40 ] Diagnosis of fibrosis Not applicable but can combine with T1 or DWI or MRE [ 35 , 41 , 45 , 89 ] cT1 AUROC for fibrosis stages: ≥ F2: 0.63–0.79 [ 32 , 85 , 102 ] ≥ F3: 0.62–0.74 [ 32 , 85 , 102 ] F4: 0.72–0.85 [ 16 ] [adapted from [ 32 ]] …”

Section: Mpmri Methods In Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…≥ G1: 0.93 [85] ≥ G2: 0.96 [85] ≥ G3: 0.94 [85] Not applicable but can add PDFF [36,40] Diagnosis of fibrosis Not applicable but can combine with T1 or DWI or MRE [35,41,45,89] cT1 AUROC for fibrosis stages: 11.0% [88] Confounded by iron…”

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Multiparametric MR mapping in clinical decision-making for diffuse liver disease

Thomaides-Brears¹,

Lepe

Banerjee³

et al. 2020

Abdom Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate diagnosis, monitoring and treatment decisions in patients with chronic liver disease currently rely on biopsy as the diagnostic gold standard, and this has constrained early detection and management of diseases that are both varied and can be concurrent. Recent developments in multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) suggest real potential to bridge the diagnostic gap between non-specific blood-based biomarkers and invasive and variable histological diagnosis. This has implications for the clinical care and treatment pathway in a number of chronic liver diseases, such as haemochromatosis, steatohepatitis and autoimmune or viral hepatitis. Here we review the relevant MRI techniques in clinical use and their limitations and describe recent potential applications in various liver diseases. We exemplify case studies that highlight how these techniques can improve clinical practice. These techniques could allow clinicians to increase their arsenals available to utilise on patients and direct appropriate treatments.

show abstract

Section: Mpmri Methods In Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mpmri Methods In Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mpmri Methods In Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Multiparametric MR mapping in clinical decision-making for diffuse liver disease

Thomaides-Brears¹,

Lepe

Banerjee³

et al. 2020

Abdom Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Clinical information (BMI, comorbidities, smoking and alcohol habits) and laboratory test results (liver enzymes, coagulation results and APRI) were recorded. Data from this patient population have already been published in other research studies [13][14][15].…”

Section: Study Populationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Liver segmental volume and attenuation ratio (LSVAR) on portal venous CT scans improves the detection of clinically significant liver fibrosis compared to liver segmental volume ratio (LSVR)

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The aim of this proof-of-concept study was to show that the liver segmental volume and attenuation ratio (LSVAR) improves the detection of significant liver fibrosis on portal venous CT scans by adding the liver vein to cava attenuation (LVCA) to the liver segmental volume ratio (LSVR). Material and methods Patients who underwent portal venous phase abdominal CT scans and MR elastography (reference standard) within 3 months between 02/2016 and 05/2017 were included. The LSVAR was calculated on portal venous CT scans as LSVR*LVCA, while the LSVR represented the volume ratio between Couinaud segments I-III and IV-VIII, and the LVCA represented the density of the liver veins compared to the density in the vena cava. The LSVAR and LSVR were compared between patients with and without significantly elevated liver stiffness (based on a cutoff value of 3.5 kPa) using the Mann–Whitney U test and ROC curve analysis. Results The LSVR and LSVAR allowed significant differentiation between patients with (n = 19) and without (n = 122) significantly elevated liver stiffness (p < 0.001). However, the LSVAR showed a higher area under the curve (AUC = 0.96) than the LSVR (AUC = 0.74). The optimal cutoff value was 0.34 for the LSVR, which detected clinically increased liver stiffness with a sensitivity of 53% and a specificity of 88%. With a cutoff value of 0.67 for the LSVAR, the sensitivity increased to 95% while maintaining a specificity of 89%. Conclusion The LSVAR improves the detection of significant liver fibrosis on portal venous CT scans compared to the LSVR.

show abstract

Advances on Nanomedicines for Diagnosis and Theranostics of Hepatic Fibrosis

Dai

Zeng

Zhang

et al. 2021

Advanced NanoBiomed Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hepatic fibrosis is induced by chronic hepatic injuries before it turns into hepatic cirrhosis/carcinoma. It is characterized by the formation of collagen and other extracellular matrices around damaged hepatic tissues; consequently, the normal architecture of liver would be disrupted and its function impaired. Diagnosis of hepatic fibrosis, especially at the early stage, is crucial because most fibrotic changes are reversible during the hepatic fibrosis stage. However, early and more accurate diagnosis of hepatic fibrosis still remains a great challenge. With their promising structural adjustability and targeting ability, nanomedicines have recently been introduced to improve diagnosis of hepatic fibrosis. By targeting fibrogenic cells, receptors, and extracellular matrix components, these nanomedicines can achieve detection of hepatic tissues with high sensitivity and specificity at the early stage. The use of nanomedicines can also enable theranostics of this chronic hepatic disease. This review aims to present an overview of recent advances of nanomedicines in diagnosis and theranostics of hepatic fibrosis.

show abstract

Liver MRI susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) compared to T2* mapping in the presence of steatosis and fibrosis

Cited by 17 publications

References 35 publications

Multiparametric MR mapping in clinical decision-making for diffuse liver disease

Multiparametric MR mapping in clinical decision-making for diffuse liver disease

Liver segmental volume and attenuation ratio (LSVAR) on portal venous CT scans improves the detection of clinically significant liver fibrosis compared to liver segmental volume ratio (LSVR)

Advances on Nanomedicines for Diagnosis and Theranostics of Hepatic Fibrosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About