Advertisement

Abdominal Radiology

, Volume 44, Issue 10, pp 3295–3303 | Cite as

Measurement of spleen fat on MRI-proton density fat fraction arises from reconstruction of noise

  • Cheng William HongEmail author
  • Gavin Hamilton
  • Catherine Hooker
  • Charlie C. Park
  • Calvin Andrew Tran
  • Walter C. Henderson
  • Jonathan C. Hooker
  • Soudabeh Fazeli Dehkordy
  • Jeffrey B. Schwimmer
  • Scott B. Reeder
  • Claude B. SirlinEmail author
Spleen

Abstract

Purpose

This study compares splenic proton density fat fraction (PDFF) measured using confounder-corrected chemical shift-encoded (CSE)-MRI to magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) in human patients at 3T.

Methods

This was a prospectively designed ancillary study to various previously described single-center studies performed in adults and children with known or suspected nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Patients underwent magnitude-based MRI (MRI-M), complex-based MRI (MRI-C), high signal-to-noise variants (Hi-SNR MRI-M and Hi-SNR MRI-C), and MRS at 3T for spleen PDFF estimation. PDFF from CSE-MRI methods were compared to MRS-PDFF using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Demographics were summarized descriptively. Spearman’s rank correlations were computed pairwise between CSE-MRI methods. Individual patient measurements were plotted for qualitative assessment. A significance level of 0.05 was used.

Results

Forty-seven patients (20 female, 27 male) including 12 adults (median 55 years old) and 35 children (median 12 years old). Median PDFF estimated by MRS, MRI-M, Hi-SNR MRI-M, MRI-C, and Hi-SNR MRI-C was 1.0, 2.3, 1.9, 2.2, and 2.0%. The four CSE-MRI methods estimated statistically significant higher spleen PDFF values compared to MRS (p < 0.0001 for all). Pairwise associations in spleen PDFF values measured by different CSE-MRI methods were weak, with the highest Spearman’s rank correlations being 0.295 between MRI-M and Hi-SNR MRI-M; none were significant after correction for multiple comparisons. No qualitative relationship was observed between PDFF measurements among the various methods.

Conclusion

Overestimation of PDFF by CSE-MRI compared to MRS and poor agreement between related CSE-MRI methods suggest that non-zero PDFF values in human spleen are artifactual.

Keywords

Spleen Fat quantification Spectroscopy CSE-MRI Artifactual 

Notes

Funding

The authors would like to acknowledge Grant Support from the National Institutes of Health T32 EB005970-09, R01 DK106419-02, R01 DK083380, K24 DK102595, R01 DK088925, and R01 DK100651-03. We also acknowledge GE Healthcare who provides research support to UCSD and UW-Madison.

References

  1. 1.
    Reeder SB, Cruite I, Hamilton G, Sirlin CB. Quantitative assessment of liver fat with magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;34(4):729–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Reeder SB, Hu HH, Sirlin CB. Proton density fat-fraction: a standardized MR-based biomarker of tissue fat concentration. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;36(5):1011–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Meisamy S, Hines CDG, Hamilton G, et al. Quantification of hepatic steatosis with T1-independent, T2-corrected MR imaging with spectral modeling of fat: blinded comparison with MR spectroscopy. Radiology. 2011;258(3):767–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yokoo T, Shiehmorteza M, Hamilton G, et al. Estimation of hepatic proton-density fat fraction by using MR imaging at 3.0 T. Radiology. 2011;258(3):749–759.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yokoo T, Bydder M, Hamilton G, et al. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: diagnostic and fat-grading accuracy of low-flip-angle multiecho gradient-recalled-echo MR imaging at 1.5 T. Radiology. 2009;251(1):67–76.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hernando D, Sharma SD, Aliyari Ghasabeh M, et al. Multisite, multivendor validation of the accuracy and reproducibility of proton-density fat-fraction quantification at 1.5T and 3T using a fat-water phantom. Magn Reson Med. 2016Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Forbes GB. Splenic lipidosis after administration of intravenous fat emulsions. J Clin Pathol. 1978;31(8):765–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cassidy FH, Yokoo T, Aganovic L, et al. Fatty Liver Disease: MR Imaging Techniques for the Detection and Quantification of Liver Steatosis. RadioGraphics. Radiological Society of North America; 2009;29(1):231–260.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    İdilman İS, Gümrük F, Haliloğlu M, Karçaaltıncaba M. The Feasibility of Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Quantification of Liver, Pancreas, Spleen, Vertebral Bone Marrow, and Renal Cortex R2* and Proton Density Fat Fraction in Transfusion-Related Iron Overload. Turkish J Haematol Off J Turkish Soc Haematol. Galenos Yayinevi; 2016;33(1):21–27.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mamidipalli A, Hamilton G, Manning P, et al. Cross-sectional correlation between hepatic R2* and proton density fat fraction (PDFF) in children with hepatic steatosis. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018;47(2):418–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Loomba R, Sirlin CB, Ang B, et al. Ezetimibe for the treatment of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis: assessment by novel magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance elastography in a randomized trial (MOZART trial). Hepatology. 2015;61(4):1239–1250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cui J, Philo L, Nguyen P, et al. Sitagliptin vs. placebo for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: A randomized controlled trial. J Hepatol. 2016;65(2):369–376.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Doycheva I, Cui J, Nguyen P, et al. Non-invasive screening of diabetics in primary care for NAFLD and advanced fibrosis by MRI and MRE. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. NIH Public Access; 2016;43(1):83–95.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Loomba R, Seguritan V, Li W, et al. Gut Microbiome-Based Metagenomic Signature for Non-invasive Detection of Advanced Fibrosis in Human Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. Cell Metab. 2017;25(5):1054–1062.e5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Motosugi U, Hernando D, Wiens C, Bannas P, Reeder SB. High SNR Acquisitions Improve the Repeatability of Liver Fat Quantification Using Confounder-corrected Chemical Shift-encoded MR Imaging. Magn Reson Med Sci. 2017Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hamilton G, Yokoo T, Bydder M, et al. In vivo characterization of the liver fat 1H MR spectrum. NMR Biomed. 2011;24(7):784–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kühn J-P, Hernando D, Mensel B, et al. Quantitative chemical shift-encoded MRI is an accurate method to quantify hepatic steatosis. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014;39(6):1494–1501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bydder M, Yokoo T, Hamilton G, et al. Relaxation effects in the quantification of fat using gradient echo imaging. Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;26(3):347–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hernando D, Hines CDG, Yu H, Reeder SB. Addressing phase errors in fat-water imaging using a mixed magnitude/complex fitting method. Magn Reson Med. NIH Public Access; 2012;67(3):638–644.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yu H, Shimakawa A, Hines CDG, et al. Combination of complex-based and magnitude-based multiecho water-fat separation for accurate quantification of fat-fraction. Magn Reson Med. 2011;66(1):199–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kühn J-P, Jahn C, Hernando D, et al. T1 bias in chemical shift-encoded liver fat-fraction: Role of the flip angle. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014;40(4):875–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Johnson BL, Schroeder ME, Wolfson T, et al. Effect of flip angle on the accuracy and repeatability of hepatic proton density fat fraction estimation by complex data-based, T1-independent, T2*-corrected, spectrum-modeled MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014;39(2):440–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Reeder SB, Pineda AR, Wen Z, et al. Iterative decomposition of water and fat with echo asymmetry and least-squares estimation (IDEAL): application with fast spin-echo imaging. Magn Reson Med. 2005;54(3):636–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Reeder SB, McKenzie CA, Pineda AR, et al. Water–fat separation with IDEAL gradient-echo imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007;25(3):644–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reeder SB, Wen Z, Yu H, et al. Multicoil Dixon chemical species separation with an iterative least-squares estimation method. Magn Reson Med. 2004;51(1):35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hernando D, Haldar JP, Sutton BP, Ma J, Kellman P, Liang Z-P. Joint estimation of water/fat images and field inhomogeneity map. Magn Reson Med. 2008;59(3):571–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yu H, Shimakawa A, McKenzie CA, Brodsky E, Brittain JH, Reeder SB. Multiecho water-fat separation and simultaneous R2* estimation with multifrequency fat spectrum modeling. Magn Reson Med. NIH Public Access; 2008;60(5):1122–1134.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hamilton G, Middleton MS, Hooker JC, et al. In vivo breath-hold (1) H MRS simultaneous estimation of liver proton density fat fraction, and T1 and T2 of water and fat, with a multi-TR, multi-TE sequence. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;42(6):1538–1543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bydder M, Hamilton G, Yokoo T, Sirlin CB. Optimal phased-array combination for spectroscopy. Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;26(6):847–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vanhamme, van den Boogaart A, Van Huffel S. Improved method for accurate and efficient quantification of MRS data with use of prior knowledge. J Magn Reson. 1997;129(1):35–43.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Naressi A, Couturier C, Devos JM, et al. Java-based graphical user interface for the MRUI quantitation package. MAGMA. 2001;12(2–3):141–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Haufe WM, Wolfson T, Hooker CA, et al. Accuracy of PDFF estimation by magnitude-based and complex-based MRI in children with MR spectroscopy as a reference. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2017Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bashir MR, Huang R, Mayes N, et al. Concordance of hypervascular liver nodule characterization between the organ procurement and transplant network and liver imaging reporting and data system classifications. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015;42(2):305–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Karlsson M, Ekstedt M, Dahlström N, et al. Liver R2* is affected by both iron and fat: A dual biopsy-validated study of chronic liver disease. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2019Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Roberts NT, Hernando D, Holmes JH, Wiens CN, Reeder SB. Noise properties of proton density fat fraction estimated using chemical shift-encoded MRI. Magn Reson Med. 2018;80(2):685–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Liu C-Y, McKenzie CA, Yu H, Brittain JH, Reeder SB. Fat quantification with IDEAL gradient echo imaging: correction of bias from T(1) and noise. Magn Reson Med. 2007;58(2):354–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Colgan TJ, Hernando D, Sharma SD, Reeder SB. The effects of concomitant gradients on chemical shift encoded MRI. Magn Reson Med. 2017;78(2):730–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yokoo T, Serai SD, Pirasteh A, et al. Linearity, Bias, and Precision of Hepatic Proton Density Fat Fraction Measurements by Using MR Imaging: A Meta-Analysis. Radiology. 2017;170550.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Nasr P, Forsgren MF, Ignatova S, et al. Using a 3% Proton Density Fat Fraction as a Cut-Off Value Increases Sensitivity of Detection of Hepatic Steatosis, Based on Results From Histopathology Analysis. Gastroenterology. 2017;153(1):53–55.e7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Idilman IS, Tuzun A, Savas B, et al. Quantification of liver, pancreas, kidney, and vertebral body MRI-PDFF in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Abdom Imaging. 2015;40(6):1512–1519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hong CW, Fazeli Dehkordy S, Hooker JC, Hamilton G, Sirlin CB. Fat Quantification in the Abdomen. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2017;26(6):221–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cheng William Hong
    • 1
    • 5
    Email author
  • Gavin Hamilton
    • 1
  • Catherine Hooker
    • 1
  • Charlie C. Park
    • 1
  • Calvin Andrew Tran
    • 1
  • Walter C. Henderson
    • 1
  • Jonathan C. Hooker
    • 1
  • Soudabeh Fazeli Dehkordy
    • 1
  • Jeffrey B. Schwimmer
    • 2
    • 3
  • Scott B. Reeder
    • 4
  • Claude B. Sirlin
    • 1
    • 6
    Email author
  1. 1.Liver Imaging Group, Department of RadiologyUniversity of California San DiegoSan DiegoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Pediatrics, School of MedicineUniversity of California San DiegoLa JollaUSA
  3. 3.Department of GastroenterologyRady Children’s Hospital San DiegoSan DiegoUSA
  4. 4.Departments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency MedicineUniversity of Wisconsin MadisonMadisonUSA
  5. 5.San DiegoUSA
  6. 6.La JollaUSA

Personalised recommendations