骨与骺端的扩散张量成像通用化。

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Katherine L. Luo MD, PhD, Laura Santos MD, Rumana Tokaria MBBS, Sachin Jambawalikar PhD, Phuong T. Duong MD, José G. Raya PhD, Sogol Mostoufi-Moab MD, MSCE, Diego Jaramillo MD, MPH
{"title":"骨与骺端的扩散张量成像通用化。","authors":"Katherine L. Luo MD, PhD,&nbsp;Laura Santos MD,&nbsp;Rumana Tokaria MBBS,&nbsp;Sachin Jambawalikar PhD,&nbsp;Phuong T. Duong MD,&nbsp;José G. Raya PhD,&nbsp;Sogol Mostoufi-Moab MD, MSCE,&nbsp;Diego Jaramillo MD, MPH","doi":"10.1002/jmri.29455","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Current methods to predict height potential are inaccurate. Predicting height by using MRI of the physeal cartilage has shown promise but the applicability of this technique in different imaging setups has not been well-evaluated.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>To assess variability in diffusion tensor imaging of the physis and metaphysis (DTI-P/M) of the distal femur between different scanners, imaging parameters, tractography software, and resolution.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Study Type</h3>\n \n <p>Prospective.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Population/Subjects</h3>\n \n <p>Eleven healthy subjects (five males and six females ages 10–16.94).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Field Strength/Sequence</h3>\n \n <p>3 T; DTI single shot echo planar sequences.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Assessment</h3>\n \n <p>Physeal DTI tract measurements of the distal femur were compared between different scanners, imaging parameters, tractography settings, interpolation correction, and tractography software.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Statistical Tests</h3>\n \n <p>Bland–Altman, Spearman correlation, linear regression, and Shapiro–Wilk tests. Threshold for statistical significance was set at <i>P</i> = 0.05.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>DTI tract values consistently showed low variability with different imaging and analysis settings. Vendor to vendor comparison exhibited strong correlation (<i>ρ</i> = 0.93) and small but significant bias (bias −5.76, limits of agreement [LOA] −24.31 to 12.78). Strong correlation and no significant difference were seen between technical replicates of the General Electric MRI scanner (<i>ρ</i> = 1, bias 0.17 [LOA −1.5 to 1.2], <i>P</i> = 0.42) and the Siemens MRI scanner (<i>ρ</i> = 0.89, bias = 0.56, <i>P</i> = 0.71). Different voxel sizes (1 × 1 × 2 mm<sup>3</sup> vs. 2 × 2 × 3 mm<sup>3</sup>) did not significantly affect DTI values (bias = 1.4 [LOA −5.7 to 8.4], <i>P</i> = 0.35) but maintained a strong correlation (<i>ρ</i> = 0.82). Gap size (0 mm vs. 0.6 mm) significantly affects tract volume (bias = 1.8 [LOA −5.4 to 1.8]) but maintains a strong correlation (<i>ρ</i> = 0.93). Comparison of tractography algorithms generated significant differences in tract number, length, and volume while maintaining correlation (<i>ρ</i> = 0.86, 0.99, 0.93, respectively). Comparison of interobserver variability between different tractography software also revealed significant differences while maintaining high correlation (<i>ρ</i> = 0.85–0.98).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Data Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>DTI of the pediatric physis cartilage shows high reproducibility between different imaging and analytic parameters.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Evidence Level</h3>\n \n <p>2</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Technical Efficacy</h3>\n \n <p>Stage 1</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16140,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging","volume":"61 2","pages":"798-804"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11706308/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Generalizing Diffusion Tensor Imaging of the Physis and Metaphysis\",\"authors\":\"Katherine L. Luo MD, PhD,&nbsp;Laura Santos MD,&nbsp;Rumana Tokaria MBBS,&nbsp;Sachin Jambawalikar PhD,&nbsp;Phuong T. Duong MD,&nbsp;José G. Raya PhD,&nbsp;Sogol Mostoufi-Moab MD, MSCE,&nbsp;Diego Jaramillo MD, MPH\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jmri.29455\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Current methods to predict height potential are inaccurate. Predicting height by using MRI of the physeal cartilage has shown promise but the applicability of this technique in different imaging setups has not been well-evaluated.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>To assess variability in diffusion tensor imaging of the physis and metaphysis (DTI-P/M) of the distal femur between different scanners, imaging parameters, tractography software, and resolution.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Study Type</h3>\\n \\n <p>Prospective.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Population/Subjects</h3>\\n \\n <p>Eleven healthy subjects (five males and six females ages 10–16.94).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Field Strength/Sequence</h3>\\n \\n <p>3 T; DTI single shot echo planar sequences.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Assessment</h3>\\n \\n <p>Physeal DTI tract measurements of the distal femur were compared between different scanners, imaging parameters, tractography settings, interpolation correction, and tractography software.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Statistical Tests</h3>\\n \\n <p>Bland–Altman, Spearman correlation, linear regression, and Shapiro–Wilk tests. Threshold for statistical significance was set at <i>P</i> = 0.05.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>DTI tract values consistently showed low variability with different imaging and analysis settings. Vendor to vendor comparison exhibited strong correlation (<i>ρ</i> = 0.93) and small but significant bias (bias −5.76, limits of agreement [LOA] −24.31 to 12.78). Strong correlation and no significant difference were seen between technical replicates of the General Electric MRI scanner (<i>ρ</i> = 1, bias 0.17 [LOA −1.5 to 1.2], <i>P</i> = 0.42) and the Siemens MRI scanner (<i>ρ</i> = 0.89, bias = 0.56, <i>P</i> = 0.71). Different voxel sizes (1 × 1 × 2 mm<sup>3</sup> vs. 2 × 2 × 3 mm<sup>3</sup>) did not significantly affect DTI values (bias = 1.4 [LOA −5.7 to 8.4], <i>P</i> = 0.35) but maintained a strong correlation (<i>ρ</i> = 0.82). Gap size (0 mm vs. 0.6 mm) significantly affects tract volume (bias = 1.8 [LOA −5.4 to 1.8]) but maintains a strong correlation (<i>ρ</i> = 0.93). Comparison of tractography algorithms generated significant differences in tract number, length, and volume while maintaining correlation (<i>ρ</i> = 0.86, 0.99, 0.93, respectively). Comparison of interobserver variability between different tractography software also revealed significant differences while maintaining high correlation (<i>ρ</i> = 0.85–0.98).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Data Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>DTI of the pediatric physis cartilage shows high reproducibility between different imaging and analytic parameters.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Evidence Level</h3>\\n \\n <p>2</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Technical Efficacy</h3>\\n \\n <p>Stage 1</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16140,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging\",\"volume\":\"61 2\",\"pages\":\"798-804\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11706308/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jmri.29455\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jmri.29455","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目前预测身高潜力的方法并不准确。目的:评估股骨远端骺端和骺端的弥散张量成像(DTI-P/M)在不同扫描仪、成像参数、成像软件和分辨率之间的差异:人群/受试者:11名健康受试者(5男6女,年龄10-16.94岁):场强/序列:3 T;DTI 单次回波平面序列:评估:比较不同扫描仪、成像参数、牵引成像设置、插值校正和牵引成像软件对股骨远端的骨骺DTI牵引测量结果:统计检验:Bland-Altman 检验、Spearman 相关检验、线性回归检验和 Shapiro-Wilk 检验。统计显著性阈值设定为 P = 0.05:结果:在不同的成像和分析设置下,DTI 道值始终显示出较低的可变性。供应商与供应商之间的比较显示出较强的相关性(ρ = 0.93)和较小但显著的偏差(偏差 -5.76,一致性[LOA] -24.31至12.78)。通用电气磁共振成像扫描仪(ρ = 1,偏差 0.17 [LOA -1.5 至 1.2],P = 0.42)和西门子磁共振成像扫描仪(ρ = 0.89,偏差 = 0.56,P = 0.71)的技术重复之间具有很强的相关性,没有明显差异。不同的体素大小(1 × 1 × 2 mm3 vs. 2 × 2 × 3 mm3)对 DTI 值没有显著影响(偏差 = 1.4 [LOA -5.7 to 8.4],P = 0.35),但保持了很强的相关性(ρ = 0.82)。间隙大小(0 毫米 vs. 0.6 毫米)会显著影响束体积(偏差 = 1.8 [LOA -5.4 至 1.8]),但仍保持较强的相关性(ρ = 0.93)。在保持相关性(ρ = 0.86、0.99、0.93)的情况下,对各种束成像算法进行比较会发现束的数量、长度和体积存在明显差异。比较不同束成像软件的观察者间变异性也发现了显著差异,同时保持了较高的相关性(ρ = 0.85-0.98):小儿腓骨软骨的 DTI 在不同成像和分析参数之间显示出较高的可重复性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Generalizing Diffusion Tensor Imaging of the Physis and Metaphysis

Generalizing Diffusion Tensor Imaging of the Physis and Metaphysis

Background

Current methods to predict height potential are inaccurate. Predicting height by using MRI of the physeal cartilage has shown promise but the applicability of this technique in different imaging setups has not been well-evaluated.

Purpose

To assess variability in diffusion tensor imaging of the physis and metaphysis (DTI-P/M) of the distal femur between different scanners, imaging parameters, tractography software, and resolution.

Study Type

Prospective.

Population/Subjects

Eleven healthy subjects (five males and six females ages 10–16.94).

Field Strength/Sequence

3 T; DTI single shot echo planar sequences.

Assessment

Physeal DTI tract measurements of the distal femur were compared between different scanners, imaging parameters, tractography settings, interpolation correction, and tractography software.

Statistical Tests

Bland–Altman, Spearman correlation, linear regression, and Shapiro–Wilk tests. Threshold for statistical significance was set at P = 0.05.

Results

DTI tract values consistently showed low variability with different imaging and analysis settings. Vendor to vendor comparison exhibited strong correlation (ρ = 0.93) and small but significant bias (bias −5.76, limits of agreement [LOA] −24.31 to 12.78). Strong correlation and no significant difference were seen between technical replicates of the General Electric MRI scanner (ρ = 1, bias 0.17 [LOA −1.5 to 1.2], P = 0.42) and the Siemens MRI scanner (ρ = 0.89, bias = 0.56, P = 0.71). Different voxel sizes (1 × 1 × 2 mm3 vs. 2 × 2 × 3 mm3) did not significantly affect DTI values (bias = 1.4 [LOA −5.7 to 8.4], P = 0.35) but maintained a strong correlation (ρ = 0.82). Gap size (0 mm vs. 0.6 mm) significantly affects tract volume (bias = 1.8 [LOA −5.4 to 1.8]) but maintains a strong correlation (ρ = 0.93). Comparison of tractography algorithms generated significant differences in tract number, length, and volume while maintaining correlation (ρ = 0.86, 0.99, 0.93, respectively). Comparison of interobserver variability between different tractography software also revealed significant differences while maintaining high correlation (ρ = 0.85–0.98).

Data Conclusion

DTI of the pediatric physis cartilage shows high reproducibility between different imaging and analytic parameters.

Evidence Level

2

Technical Efficacy

Stage 1

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
6.80%
发文量
494
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (JMRI) is an international journal devoted to the timely publication of basic and clinical research, educational and review articles, and other information related to the diagnostic applications of magnetic resonance.
×
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