[Accuracy of Proton Density Fat Fraction Measurement Using Chemical Shift-encoded MRI with Fast Imaging Techniques].

Tomofumi Misaka, Satoshi Takenaka, Takayuki Ishida
{"title":"[Accuracy of Proton Density Fat Fraction Measurement Using Chemical Shift-encoded MRI with Fast Imaging Techniques].","authors":"Tomofumi Misaka, Satoshi Takenaka, Takayuki Ishida","doi":"10.6009/jjrt.25-1464","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To investigate the accuracy of proton density fat fraction (PDFF) measurement using chemical shift-encoded MRI (CSE-MRI) with fast imaging techniques in a phantom.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 1.5T imaging system (Prodiva; Philips Healthcare) and PDFF phantom (Fat Fraction Phantom Model 300; Calimetrix) were used in this study. The acquisitions without fast imaging techniques (conventional acquisition), with parallel imaging in phase-encode direction (SENSE acquisition), with compressed sensing (CS-SENSE acquisition), and with parallel imaging in both phase-encode and slice-encode direction (Dual-SENSE acquisition) were performed. The following acceleration factors in SENSE and CS-SENSE acquisition were used: 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, and 8.0. For Dual-SENSE acquisition, the same acceleration factors (1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0) were set in each of the two directions. The relationships between reference PDFF values and PDFF measurements obtained using each acquisition were assessed using linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>According to the linear regression analysis, the slopes and intercepts of regression lines were from 0.87 to 1.02 and from 0.06% to 3.55%, respectively. According to Bland-Altman analysis, there were fixed bias between reference PDFF values and PDFF measurements obtained using SENSE acquisition with reduction factor 8.0 and Dual-SENSE acquisition with reduction factor 5.0. For CS-SENSE acquisition with reduction factor from 7.0 to 8.0, SENSE acquisition with reduction factor from 3.0 to 8.0, and Dual-SENSE acquisition with reduction factor from 2.0 to 5.0, some vials had ±1.5% or more errors between the reference PDFF values and PDFF measurements in the range of 0% to 50% PDFF.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In CS-SENSE acquisition, the accuracy of PDFF measurement was maintained within 1.5% up to a reduction factor 6.0. The accuracy of PDFF measurement was maintained within 1.5% up to a reduction factor 2.0 in SENSE acquisition and a reduction factor 1.5 in Dual-SENSE acquisition.</p>","PeriodicalId":74309,"journal":{"name":"Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai zasshi","volume":"81 3","pages":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai zasshi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6009/jjrt.25-1464","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the accuracy of proton density fat fraction (PDFF) measurement using chemical shift-encoded MRI (CSE-MRI) with fast imaging techniques in a phantom.

Methods: A 1.5T imaging system (Prodiva; Philips Healthcare) and PDFF phantom (Fat Fraction Phantom Model 300; Calimetrix) were used in this study. The acquisitions without fast imaging techniques (conventional acquisition), with parallel imaging in phase-encode direction (SENSE acquisition), with compressed sensing (CS-SENSE acquisition), and with parallel imaging in both phase-encode and slice-encode direction (Dual-SENSE acquisition) were performed. The following acceleration factors in SENSE and CS-SENSE acquisition were used: 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, and 8.0. For Dual-SENSE acquisition, the same acceleration factors (1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0) were set in each of the two directions. The relationships between reference PDFF values and PDFF measurements obtained using each acquisition were assessed using linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman analysis.

Results: According to the linear regression analysis, the slopes and intercepts of regression lines were from 0.87 to 1.02 and from 0.06% to 3.55%, respectively. According to Bland-Altman analysis, there were fixed bias between reference PDFF values and PDFF measurements obtained using SENSE acquisition with reduction factor 8.0 and Dual-SENSE acquisition with reduction factor 5.0. For CS-SENSE acquisition with reduction factor from 7.0 to 8.0, SENSE acquisition with reduction factor from 3.0 to 8.0, and Dual-SENSE acquisition with reduction factor from 2.0 to 5.0, some vials had ±1.5% or more errors between the reference PDFF values and PDFF measurements in the range of 0% to 50% PDFF.

Conclusion: In CS-SENSE acquisition, the accuracy of PDFF measurement was maintained within 1.5% up to a reduction factor 6.0. The accuracy of PDFF measurement was maintained within 1.5% up to a reduction factor 2.0 in SENSE acquisition and a reduction factor 1.5 in Dual-SENSE acquisition.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信