Optimization of intra-voxel incoherent motion imaging at 3.0 Tesla for fast liver examination

Leporq, Benjamin; Saint‐Jalmes, Hervé; Rabrait, C.; Pilleul, F.; Guillaud, Olivier; Dumortier, Jérôme; Scoazec, Jean‐Yves; Beuf, Olivier

doi:10.1002/jmri.24693

Cited by 50 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 26 publications

(39 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…4) vary substantially between the various b-value distributions. The mapped 11-b-value distribution by Leporq et al 21 performs clearly better than the mapped 9-b-value distribution by Klauss et al, 26 whereas the 6 b-values between 100 and 800 s/mm 2 are the same in both cases. The differences are mainly found in the lower b-value range where the former has 2 more b-values.…”

Section: Distributions Of B-values In Literature and Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 72%

Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Protocol Evaluation and Data Quality in Normal and Malignant Liver Tissue and Comparison to the Literature

Voert¹,

Delso²,

Porto

et al. 2016

Investigative Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVES: Although intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) becomes more and more popular, there is currently no clear consensus on the number and distribution of b-values to use. In this work, we (1) tested and evaluated the data quality of a 25-b-value IVIM protocol in patients with malignant liver lesions and normal liver tissue as a standard of reference, (2) calculated an optimal b-value distribution and compared with the standard of reference, and (3) compared the 25-b-value protocol with other proposed protocols in the literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Intravoxel incoherent motion imaging with 25 b-values was performed at 3 T in a total of 15 patients with malignant liver lesions. Reference IVIM parameter maps were calculated in tumor and normal liver tissue. With these parameters, optimal IVIM protocols with reduced numbers of b-values were calculated. These optimal IVIM protocols were again applied to calculate new IVIM parameter maps that were compared with the reference parameter maps by calculating mean relative errors. In addition, 35 other IVIM protocols, as found in literature, were compared in a similar way with the 25-b-value protocol serving as a standard of reference. RESULTS: The mean relative error depends on the number of b-values and their distribution. In tumor tissue, the error is higher and more variable than in normal-appearing liver tissue. The largest errors occur in tumor tissue and in the protocols having low numbers of b-values in the IVIM protocols. In the calculated optimal IVIM protocols, the mean relative errors decreased by 40% or more when the number of b-values included increased from 4 to 16. The mean relative errors in the protocols adapted from the literature vary substantially between the various b-value distributions. One optimized 16-b-value protocol, which was found in literature, reduced the average relative error by 80% when compared with 4-and 5-b-value protocols listed in literature. CONCLUSIONS: Including more b-values and applying an optimized b-value distribution significantly reduces errors in the IVIM parameter estimates, thereby increasing its accuracy.This effect is even more pronounced in inhomogeneous tumor compared with that in normal liver tissue. However, when restrictions in acquisition time or patient-related factors apply, a minimum of 16 b-values should be considered for reliable results.

show abstract

Section: Distributions Of B-values In Literature and Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 72%

Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Protocol Evaluation and Data Quality in Normal and Malignant Liver Tissue and Comparison to the Literature

Voert¹,

Delso²,

Porto

et al. 2016

Investigative Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We used 6 different b-values, a lower number than some previous studies. Nevertheless, there is no consensus about the ideal number of b-values that should be used and, moreover, it has been demonstrated the feasibility of IVIM analysis of DW images using a number of b-value as low as 4 [17,37]. We have assessed test-retest reproducibility in volunteers and not in patients with liver diseases; the obtained results from normal tissue might not be adequately extrapolated to diseased livers [38].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of fibrosis and inflammation in diffuse liver diseases using intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted MR imaging

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the role of intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) diffusion model for the assessment of liver fibrosis and inflammation in diffuse liver disorders, also considering the presence of liver steatosis and iron deposits. Methods: Seventy-four patients were included, with liver biopsy and a 3 Tesla abdominal magnetic resonance imaging examination, with an IVIM diffusion-weighted sequence (single-shot spin-echo echo-planar sequence, with gradient reversal fat suppression; 6 b-values: 0, 50, 200, 400, 600, and 800 s/mm 2 ). Histological evaluation comprised the Ishak modified scale, for grading inflammation and fibrosis, plus steatosis and iron loading classification. The liver apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and IVIM parameters (D, D*, f) were calculated from the IVIM images. The relationship between IVIM parameters and histopathological scores were evaluated by ANOVA and Spearman correlation tests. A testretest experiment assessed reproducibility and repeatability in 10 healthy volunteers and 10 randomly selected patient studies. Results: ADC and f values were lower with higher fibrosis stages (p = 0.009, p = 0.006, respectively) and also with higher necro-inflammatory activity grades (p = 0.02, p = 0.017, respectively). Considered together, only fibrosis presented a significant effect on ADC and f measurements (p < 0.05), whereas inflammation had no significant effect (p > 0.05). A mild correlation was found between ADC and f with fibrosis (R S = -0.32 and R S = -0.38; p < 0.05) and inflammation (R S = -0.31 and R S = -0.32, p < 0.05; respectively). The AUROC for ADC and f measurements with the different dichotomizations between fibrosis or inflammation grades were only fair (0.670 to 0.749, p < 0.05). Neither D nor D* values were significantly different between liver fibrosis or inflammation grades. D measurements were significantly different across histologic grades of steatosis (p < 0.001) and iron overload (p < 0.001), whereas f measurements showed significant differences across histologic steatosis grades (p = 0.005).

show abstract

“…Various fitting algorithms have been used to determine IVIM parameters, including asymptotic fitting (9)(10)(11)(12)(19)(20)(21)24,41,45,46,48,51,53), nonlinear least square (usually Levenberg-Marquardt) fitting (23,42,47,52,54,55), and Bayesian fitting (15,22,40,43,50). Current review cannot draw conclusion which one is better than others, nor can the mean values be compared (Figure 8).…”

Section: Image Post-processing Methods For Ivim Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Accumulation of collagen deposits and activated stellate cells contribute to increased hepatic resistance to portal blood flow, development of portal hypertension, and reduced portal blood perfusion. The decrease of blood perfusion can arise from a number of concomitant alterations in the tissue microenvironment, including collagen deposition, fatty (9)(10)(11)15,23,24,42,43,45,46,(48)(49)(50)(51)(53)(54)(55), free-breathing (FB) (19)(20)(21)40,41,47), and breath-hold (BH) (44). Solid line represents the median value of each group.…”

Section: Ivim For Liver Fibrosis Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Liver intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) magnetic resonance imaging: a comprehensive review of published data on normal values and applications for fibrosis and tumor evaluation

Lǐ¹,

Cercueil²,

Yuan³

et al. 2017

Quant. Imaging Med. Surg.

127

210

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Optimization of intra-voxel incoherent motion imaging at 3.0 Tesla for fast liver examination

Cited by 50 publications

References 26 publications

Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Protocol Evaluation and Data Quality in Normal and Malignant Liver Tissue and Comparison to the Literature

Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Protocol Evaluation and Data Quality in Normal and Malignant Liver Tissue and Comparison to the Literature

Evaluation of fibrosis and inflammation in diffuse liver diseases using intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted MR imaging

Liver intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) magnetic resonance imaging: a comprehensive review of published data on normal values and applications for fibrosis and tumor evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About