Address reprint requests to: R.L.E., Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St. SW, Rochester, MN 55905. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author

Jin Wang MD,

Jin Wang MD

Department of Radiology, Third Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University (SYSU), Guangzhou, Guangdong, P.R China

Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Kevin J. Glaser PhD,

Kevin J. Glaser PhD

Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Tianhui Zhang MS,

Tianhui Zhang MS

Department of Radiology, Third Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University (SYSU), Guangzhou, Guangdong, P.R China

Search for more papers by this author

Qungang Shan MS,

Qungang Shan MS

Department of Radiology, Third Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University (SYSU), Guangzhou, Guangdong, P.R China

Search for more papers by this author

Bingjun He BS,

Bingjun He BS

Department of Radiology, Third Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University (SYSU), Guangzhou, Guangdong, P.R China

Search for more papers by this author

Jun Chen PhD,

Jun Chen PhD

Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Meng Yin PhD,

Meng Yin PhD

Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Bogdan Dzyubak PhD,

Bogdan Dzyubak PhD

orcid.org/0000-0002-5048-4643

Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Jennifer L. Kugel PhD,

Jennifer L. Kugel PhD

Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Scott A. Kruse PhD,

Scott A. Kruse PhD

Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Roger C. Grimm PhD,

Roger C. Grimm PhD

Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Sudhakar K. Venkatesh MD,

Sudhakar K. Venkatesh MD

Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

Search for more papers by this author

Richard L. Ehman MD,

Corresponding Author

Richard L. Ehman MD

[email protected]

Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

Address reprint requests to: R.L.E., Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St. SW, Rochester, MN 55905. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author

First published: 11 August 2017

https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25818

Citations: 33

Share a link

Email
Wechat
Bluesky

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the success rate, image quality, and the ability to stage liver fibrosis of a standard 2D gradient-recalled echo (GRE) and four different spin-echo (SE) magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) sequences in patients with different liver iron concentrations.

Materials and Methods

A total of 332 patients who underwent 3T MRE examinations that included liver fat and iron quantification were enrolled, including 136 patients with all five MRE techniques. Thirty-four patients had biopsy results for fibrosis staging. The liver stiffness, region of interest area, image quality, and success rate of the five sequences were compared in 115/136 patients. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) and the accuracies for diagnosing early-stage fibrosis and advanced fibrosis were compared. The effect of BMI (body mass index), the R2* relaxation time, and fat fraction on the image quality and liver stiffness measurements were analyzed.

Results

The success rates were significantly higher in the four SE sequences (99.1–100%) compared with GRE MRE (85.3%) (all P < 0.001). There were significant differences of the mean ROI area between every pair of sequences (all P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in the AUC of the five MRE sequences for discriminating advanced fibrosis (10 P-values ranging from 0.2410–0.9171). R2* had a significant effect on the success rate and image quality for the noniron 2D echo-planar imaging (EPI), 3D EPI and 2D GRE (all P < 0.001) sequences. BMI had a significant effect on the iron 2D EPI (P = 0.0230) and iron 2D SE (P = 0.0040) sequences.

Conclusion

All five techniques showed good diagnostic performance in staging liver fibrosis. The SE MRE sequences had higher success rates and better image quality than GRE MRE in 3T clinical hepatic imaging.

Level of Evidence: 3

Technical Efficacy: Stage 5

J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:976–987.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Mayo Clinic and RLE, KJG, JC, MY, BD, JK, SK, RG have intellectual property rights and a financial interest in MRE technology through equity in and licensing of intellectual property through Resoundant, Inc. RLE serves as CEO of Resoundant, Inc. None of the other authors have conflicts of interest or any specific financial interests relevant to the subject of this article.

REFERENCES

1Loomba R, Wolfson T, Ang B, et al. Magnetic resonance elastography predicts advanced fibrosis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a prospective study. Hepatology 2014; 60: 1920–1928.
10.1002/hep.27362
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
2Venkatesh SK, Yin M, Ehman RL. Magnetic resonance elastography of liver: technique, analysis, and clinical applications. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013; 37: 544–555.
10.1002/jmri.23731
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
3Kim D, Kim WR, Talwalkar JA, et al. Advanced fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: noninvasive assessment with MR elastography. Radiology 2013; 268: 411–419.
10.1148/radiol.13121193
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
4Loomba 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: 1239–1250.
10.1002/hep.27647
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
5Singh S, Venkatesh SK, Wang Z, et al. Diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance elastography in staging liver fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2015; 13: 440–451 e6.
10.1016/j.cgh.2014.09.046
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
6Shi Y, Guo Q, Xia F, et al. 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; 273: 88–98.
10.1148/radiol.14132592
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
7Shin SU, Lee JM, Yu MH, et al. Prediction of esophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis: usefulness of three-dimensional MR elastography with echo-planar imaging technique. Radiology 2014; 272: 143–153.
10.1148/radiol.14130916
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
8Yin M, Glaser KJ, Talwalkar JA, et al. Hepatic MR elastography: clinical performance in a series of 1377 consecutive examinations. Radiology 2016; 278: 114–124.
10.1148/radiol.2015142141
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
9Chen J, Woodrum DA, Glaser KJ, et al. Assessment of in vivo laser ablation using MR elastography with an inertial driver. Magn Reson Med 2014; 72: 59–67.
10.1002/mrm.24891
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
10Singh S, Venkatesh SK, Loomba R, et al. Magnetic resonance elastography for staging liver fibrosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a diagnostic accuracy systematic review and individual participant data pooled analysis. Eur Radiol 2016; 26: 1431–1440.
10.1007/s00330-015-3949-z
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
11Venkatesh SK, Ehman RL. Magnetic resonance elastography of liver. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2014; 22: 433–446.
10.1016/j.mric.2014.05.001
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
12Towbin AJ, Serai SD, Podberesky DJ. Magnetic resonance imaging of the pediatric liver: imaging of steatosis, iron deposition, and fibrosis. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2013; 21: 669–680.
10.1016/j.mric.2013.05.001
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
13Stanley DW, Glaser KL, Ehman RL. A protocol for assessing hepatic fibrosis in iron-overloaded liver tissue with MR elastography. In: Proc 17th Annual Meeting ISMRM, Honolulu; 2009. p 716.
Google Scholar
14Rump J, Klatt A, Braun J, et al. Fractional encoding of harmonic motions in MR elastography. Magn Reson Med 2007; 57: 388–395.
10.1002/mrm.21152
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
15Tang A, Cloutier G, Szeverenyi NM, et al. Ultrasound elastography and MR elastography for assessing liver fibrosis. Part 1. Principles and techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205: 22–32.
10.2214/AJR.15.14552
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
16Mariappan YK, Glaser K, McGee KP, et al. MR elastography of liver with iron overload: development, evaluation and preliminary clinical experience with improved spin echo and spin echo EPI sequences. In: Proc 21st Annual Meeting ISMRM, Salt Lake City; 2013. p 21.
Google Scholar
17Dzyubak B, Glaser K, Yin M, et al. Automated liver stiffness measurements with magnetic resonance elastography. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013; 38: 371–379.
10.1002/jmri.23980
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
18Mariappan YK, Dzyubak B, Glaser KJ, et al. Application of modified spin-echo-based sequences for hepatic MR elastography: evaluation, comparison with the conventional gradient-echo sequence, and preliminary clinical experience. Radiology 2017; 282: 390–398.
10.1148/radiol.2016160153
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
19Tan TC, Crawford DH, Jaskowski LA, et al. Excess iron modulates endoplasmic reticulum stress-associated pathways in a mouse model of alcohol and high-fat diet-induced liver injury. Lab Invest 2013; 93: 1295–1312.
10.1038/labinvest.2013.121
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
20Anwar M, Wood J, Manwani D, et al. Hepatic iron quantification on 3 Tesla (3 T) magnetic resonance (MR): Technical challenges and solutions. Radiol Res Pract 2013; 628150.
PubMed Google Scholar
21Queiroz-Andrade M, Blasbalg R, Ortega CD, et al. MR imaging findings of iron overload. Radiographics 2009; 29: 1575–1589.
10.1148/rg.296095511
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
22Hernando D, Levin YS, Sirlin CB, et al. Quantification of liver iron with MRI: state of the art and remaining challenges. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014; 40: 1003–1021.
10.1002/jmri.24584
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
23Wagner M, Besa C, Bou Ayache J, et al. Magnetic resonance elastography of the liver: qualitative and quantitative comparison of gradient echo and spin echo echoplanar imaging sequences. Invest Radiol 2016; 51: 575–581.
10.1097/RLI.0000000000000269
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
24Shi Y, Glaser KJ, Venkatesh SK, et al. Feasibility of using 3D MR elastography to determine pancreatic stiffness in healthy volunteers. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015; 41: 369–375.
10.1002/jmri.24572
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
25Hernando D, Wells SA, Vigen KK, et al. Effect of hepatocyte-specific gadolinium-based contrast agents on hepatic fat-fraction and R2. Magn Reson Imaging 2015; 33: 43–50.
10.1016/j.mri.2014.10.001
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
26Idilman 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: 1512–1519.
10.1007/s00261-015-0385-0
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
27Dzyubak B, Venkatesh SK, Ehman RL. Evaluation of spin-echo based sequences for MR elastography of liver with iron overload. In: Proc 23rd Annual Meeting ISMRM, Toronto; 2015. p 1908.
Google Scholar
28Yasar TK, Ayache JB, Bane O, et al. MR elastography of the liver: qualitative and quantitative comparison of GRE and EPI sequences. In: Proc 23rd Annual Meeting ISMRM, Toronto; 2015. p 4067.
Google Scholar
29Wagner M, Corcuera-Solano I, Lo G, et al. Technical failure of MR elastography examinations of the liver: experience from a large single-center study. Radiology 2017; 284: 401–412.
10.1148/radiol.2016160863
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
30Yin M, Rouviere O, Glaser KJ, et al. Diffraction-biased shear wave fields generated with longitudinal magnetic resonance elastography drivers. Magn Reson Imaging 2008; 26: 770–780.
10.1016/j.mri.2008.01.019
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
31Yin M, Talwalkar JA, Manduca A, et al. Validity of a 2-D wave field model in MR elastography of the liver. In: Proc 17th Annual Meeting ISMRM, Honolulu; 2009. p 710.
Google Scholar
32Shi Y, Xia F, Li Q, et al. Magnetic resonance elastography for the evaluation of liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis B and C by using both gradient-recalled echo and spin-echo echo planar imaging: a prospective study. Am J Gastroenterol 2016; 111: 823–833.
10.1038/ajg.2016.56
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
33Morisaka H, Motosugi U, Glaser KJ, et al. Comparison of diagnostic accuracies of two- and three-dimensional MR elastography of the liver. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017; 45: 1163–1170.
10.1002/jmri.25425
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
34Arunachalam SP, Rossman PJ, Arani A, et al. Quantitative 3D magnetic resonance elastography: Comparison with dynamic mechanical analysis. Magn Reson Med 2017; 77: 1184–1192.
10.1002/mrm.26207
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
35Loomba R, Cui J, Wolfson T, et al. Novel 3D magnetic resonance elastography for the noninvasive diagnosis of advanced fibrosis in NAFLD: A prospective study. Am J Gastroenterol 2016; 111: 986–994.
10.1038/ajg.2016.65
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
36Yin M, Talwalker JA, Glaser KJ, et al. Assessment of hepatic fibrosis with magnetic resonance elastography. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007; 5: 1207–1213 e2.
10.1016/j.cgh.2007.06.012
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
37Chen J, Talwalker JA, Yin M, et al. Early detection of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease by using MR elastography. Radiology 2011; 259: 749–756.
10.1148/radiol.11101942
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
38Yoon JH, Lee JM, Suh KS, et al. Combined use of MR fat quantification and MR elastography in living liver donors: can it reduce the need for preoperative liver biopsy? Radiology 2015; 276: 453–464.
10.1148/radiol.15140908
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
39Vasanawala SS, Yu H, Shimakawa A, et al. Estimation of liver T(2) in transfusion-related iron overload in patients with weighted least squares T(2) IDEAL. Magn Reson Med 2012; 67: 183–190.
10.1002/mrm.22986
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume47, Issue4

April 2018

Pages 976-987

Assessment of advanced hepatic MR elastography methods for susceptibility artifact suppression in clinical patients

Abstract

Purpose

Materials and Methods

Results

Conclusion

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

REFERENCES

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

Assessment of advanced hepatic MR elastography methods for susceptibility artifact suppression in clinical patients

Abstract

Purpose

Materials and Methods

Results

Conclusion

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

REFERENCES

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information