Magnetic resonance elastography SE-EPI vs GRE sequences at 3T in a pediatric population with liver disease
- 127 Downloads
The goal of our study is to compare hepatic stiffness measures using gradient-recalled echo (GRE) versus spin-echo echo planar imaging (SE-EPI)-based MR Elastography (MRE) at 3T used to measure hepatic stiffness in a patients with suspected liver diseases.
Materials and methods
This retrospective study included 52 patients with liver disease who underwent a 3T MRE exam including both an investigational SE-EPI-based technique and a product GRE-based technique. Regions of interest (ROI) were placed on the elastograms to measure elastography-derived liver stiffness as well as the area included within the ROIs. The mean liver stiffness values and area of ROIs were compared.
The mean liver stiffness was 3.72 kilopascal (kPa) ± 1.29 using GRE MRE and 3.78 kPa ± 1.13 using SE-EPI MRE. Measurement of liver stiffness showed excellent agreement between the two pulse sequences with a mean bias of − 0.1 kPa (range − 1.8 to 1.7 kPa) between sequences. The mean measurable ROI area was higher with SE-EPI (313.8 cm2 ± 213.8) than with the GRE technique (208.6 cm2 ± 114.8), and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05).
Our data shows excellent agreement of measured liver stiffness between GRE and SE-EPI-based sequences at 3T. Our results show the advantage of a SE-EPI MRE sequence in terms of image quality, ROI size and acquisition time with equivalent liver stiffness measurements as compared to GRE-MRE sequence.
KeywordsFibrosis Liver Magnetic resonance imaging MR elastography GRE MRE SE-EPI MRE
We thank Carolina Maya MD (study coordinator), and Robert Carson BSRT (lead MRI technologist), of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia; Richard L. Ehman, MD, PhD, and Scott Kruse, BS, of Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN); and Christianne Leidecker, PhD, from Siemens Healthineers for their support and technical assistance related to 2D SE-EPI MRE.
- 1.Dhole, S.D., et al., Chronic Liver Diseases in Children: Clinical Profile and Histology. J Clin Diagn Res, 2015. 9(7): p. SC04-7.Google Scholar
- 11.Maharaj B Fau - Maharaj, R.J., et al., Sampling variability and its influence on the diagnostic yield of percutaneous needle biopsy of the liver. (0140-6736 (Print)).Google Scholar
- 12.Ratziu, V., et al., Survival, liver failure, and hepatocellular carcinoma in obesity-related cryptogenic cirrhosis. Hepatology, 2002. 35(0270-9139 (Print)): p. 1485-93.Google Scholar
- 13.Bedossa, P., V. Dargere D Fau - Paradis, and V. Paradis, Sampling variability of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology, 2003. 38(0270-9139 (Print)): p. 1449-57.Google Scholar
- 14.Regev, A., et al., Sampling error and intraobserver variation in liver biopsy in patients with chronic HCV infection. Am J Gastroenterol, 2002. 97(0002-9270 (Print)): p. 2614-8.Google Scholar
- 15.Cadranel, J.F., F. Rufat P Fau - Degos, and F. Degos, Practices of liver biopsy in France: results of a prospective nationwide survey. For the Group of Epidemiology of the French Association for the Study of the Liver (AFEF). Hepatology, 2000. 32(0270-9139 (Print)): p. 477-81.Google Scholar
- 16.Froehlich, F., et al., Practice and complications of liver biopsy. Results of a nationwide survey in Switzerland. Dig Dis Sci, 1993. 38(0163-2116 (Print)): p. 1480-4.Google Scholar
- 17.Piccinino F Fau - Sagnelli, E., et al., Complications following percutaneous liver biopsy. A multicentre retrospective study on 68,276 biopsies. (0168-8278 (Print)).Google Scholar
- 18.Perrault J Fau - McGill, D.B., et al., Liver biopsy: complications in 1000 inpatients and outpatients. (0016-5085 (Print)).Google Scholar
- 22.Trout, A.T., et al., Diagnostic Performance of MR Elastography for Liver Fibrosis in Children and Young Adults with a Spectrum of Liver Diseases. Radiology, 2018: p. 172099.Google Scholar
- 24.Serai, S.D., spin-echo echo-planar imaging Mr elastography versus gradient-echo Mr elastography for assessment of liver stiffness in children and Young adults suspected of having liver Disease. Radiology, 2016.Google Scholar
- 25.Chang, W., liver Fibrosis staging with Mr elastography: Comparison of Diagnostic Performance between Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B and Those with Other Etiologic Causes. Radiology, 2016.Google Scholar
- 27.Shi, Y., Mr elastography for the assessment of hepatic Fibrosis in Patients with chronic hepatitis B infection: Does Histologic Necroinflammation Influence the Measurement of Hepatic Stiffness? Radiology, 2014.Google Scholar
- 33.Hallgren, K.A., Computing Inter-Rater Reliability for Observational Data: An Overview and Tutorial. Tutor Quant Methods Psychol, 2012.8(1), p. 2Google Scholar
- 37.Serai, S.D., spin-echo echo-planar imaging Mr elastography versus gradient-echo Mr elastography for assessment of liver stiffness in children and Young adults suspected of having liver Disease. Radiology, 2016. 0000, p. 10Google Scholar
- 40.Bae, J.S., et al., Magnetic resonance elastography of healthy livers at 3.0 T: Normal liver stiffness measured by SE-EPI and GRE. European Journal of Radiology, 2018. 107: p. 46-53.Google Scholar
- 41.Suraj, S., spin-echo echo-planar imaging Mr elastography versus gradient-echo Mr elastography for assessment of liver stiffness in children and Young adults suspected of having liver Disease. Radiology, 2016.Google Scholar
- 42.Wood R Fau - Bassett, K., et al.Google Scholar