Measurement of spleen fat on MRI-proton density fat fraction arises from reconstruction of noise
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.
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.
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.
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.
KeywordsSpleen Fat quantification Spectroscopy CSE-MRI Artifactual
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.
- 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.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.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
- 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.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
- 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.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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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