Reproducibility of T1ρ and T2 quantification in a multi-vendor multi-site study

Lartey, Richard; Nanavati, Andreas; Kim, J.; Li, Mei; Xu, Kenong; Nakamura, Kunio; Shin, Wanyong; Winalski, Carl S.; Obuchowski, Nancy A.; Bahroos, Emma; Link, Thomas M.; Hardy, Peter; Peng, Qi; Kim, Jason; Liu, Kecheng; Chan, Kara K W; Wu, Chia‐Ju; Li, Xiaojuan

doi:10.1016/j.joca.2022.10.017

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…24 For inter-day repeatability, the CVs for T 1ρ measurements obtained in this study were between 2.7% and 5.7%, compared to the CVs reported in literature that ranged from 2.6% to 4.86%. 23 The ICC of T 1ρ measurements were in the range 0.52-0.73 in this study contrasting with the reported range of 0.20-0.93 observed in a study involving 10 subjects aged 18 to 35 years. 25 The CVs for intra-subject repeatability of T 2 measurements were 4.8%-7.1% for intraday in this study, compared to the previously reported CVs of 4.00%-5.00% 6 and 1.40%-4.08%, 24 which included only five knees.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…These values are slightly higher than the reported range of 1.60%-3.93% in a previous study. 23 However, it is important to note that the assessment of intra-subject repeatability in that study was only conducted on five knees. 24 For inter-day repeatability, the CVs for T 1ρ measurements obtained in this study were between 2.7% and 5.7%, compared to the CVs reported in literature that ranged from 2.6% to 4.86%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…11,13 The intra-subject and inter-subject repeatability of T 1ρ and T 2 measurements in knee cartilage have been extensively studied. 6,[23][24][25][26] In many of these studies, a 3D-MAPSS sequence was typically used for acquiring T 1ρ and T 2 relaxation times. [23][24][25] In the current work, the CVs for intra-subject repeatability of T 1ρ measurements were found to be in the range of 4.3%-6.5% for measurements obtained on the same day.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6,[23][24][25][26] In many of these studies, a 3D-MAPSS sequence was typically used for acquiring T 1ρ and T 2 relaxation times. [23][24][25] In the current work, the CVs for intra-subject repeatability of T 1ρ measurements were found to be in the range of 4.3%-6.5% for measurements obtained on the same day. These values are slightly higher than the reported range of 1.60%-3.93% in a previous study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The intra‐subject and inter‐subject repeatability of T 1ρ and T 2 measurements in knee cartilage have been extensively studied 6,23–26 . In many of these studies, a 3D‐MAPSS sequence was typically used for acquiring T 1ρ and T 2 relaxation times 23–25 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Repeatability of Quantitative Knee Cartilage T₁, T₂, and T_1ρ Mapping With 3D‐MRI Fingerprinting

Zhang,

de Moura,

Monga

et al. 2023

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThree‐dimensional MR fingerprinting (3D‐MRF) techniques have been recently described for simultaneous multiparametric mapping of knee cartilage. However, investigation of repeatability remains limited.PurposeTo assess the intra‐day and inter‐day repeatabilities of knee cartilage T1, T2, and T1ρ maps using a 3D‐MRF sequence for simultaneous measurement.Study TypeProspective.SubjectsFourteen healthy subjects (35.4 ± 9.3 years, eight males), scanned on Day 1 and Day 7.Field Strength/Sequence3 T/3D‐MRF, T1, T2, and T1ρ maps.AssessmentThe acquisition of 3D‐MRF cartilage (simultaneous acquisition of T1, T2, and T1ρ maps) were acquired using a dictionary pattern‐matching approach. Conventional cartilage T1, T2, and T1ρ maps were acquired using variable flip angles and a modified 3D‐Turbo‐Flash sequence with different echo and spin‐lock times, respectively, and were fitted using mono‐exponential models. Each sequence was acquired on Day 1 and Day 7 with two scans on each day.Statistical TestsThe mean and SD for cartilage T1, T2, and T1ρ were calculated in five manually segmented regions of interest (ROIs), including lateral femur, lateral tibia, medial femur, medial tibia, and patella cartilages. Intra‐subject and inter‐subject repeatabilities were assessed using coefficient of variation (CV) and intra‐class correlation coefficient (ICC), respectively, on the same day and among different days. Regression and Bland–Altman analysis were performed to compare maps between the conventional and 3D‐MRF sequences.ResultsThe CV in all ROIs was lower than 7.4%, 8.4%, and 7.5% and the ICC was higher than 0.56, 0.51, and 0.52 for cartilage T1, T2, and T1ρ, respectively. The MRF results had a good agreement with the conventional methods with a linear regression slope >0.61 and R2 > 0.59.ConclusionThe 3D‐MRF sequence had high intra‐subject and inter‐subject repeatabilities for simultaneously measuring knee cartilage T1, T2, and T1ρ with good agreement with conventional sequences.Evidence Level1Technical EfficacyStage 1

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Repeatability of Quantitative Knee Cartilage T₁, T₂, and T_1ρ Mapping With 3D‐MRI Fingerprinting

Zhang,

de Moura,

Monga

et al. 2023

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Novel spin‐lock time sampling strategies for improved reproducibility in quantitative T1ρ mapping

Jogi,

Peng,

Jafari

et al. 2024

NMR in Biomedicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to optimize the sampling of spin‐lock times (TSLs) in quantitative T1ρ mapping for improved reproducibility. Two new TSL sampling schemes were proposed: (i) reproducibility‐guided random sampling (RRS) and (ii) reproducibility‐guided optimal sampling (ROS). They were compared to the existing linear sampling (LS) and precision‐guided sampling (PS) schemes for T1ρ reproducibility through numerical simulations, phantom experiments, and volunteer studies. Each study evaluated the four sampling schemes with three commonly used T1ρ preparations based on composite and balanced spin‐locking. Additionally, the phantom and volunteer studies investigated the impact of B0 and B1 field inhomogeneities on T1ρ reproducibility, respectively. The reproducibility was assessed using the coefficient of variation (CoV) by repeating the T1ρ measurements eight times for phantom experiments and five times for volunteer studies. Numerical simulations resulted in lower mean CoVs for the proposed RRS (1.74%) and ROS (0.68%) compared to LS (2.93%) and PS (3.68%). In the phantom study, the mean CoVs were also lower for RRS (2.7%) and ROS (2.6%) compared to LS (4.1%) and PS (3.1%). Furthermore, the mean CoVs of the proposed RRS and ROS were statistically lower (P < 0.001) compared to existing LS and PS schemes at a B1 offset of 20%. In the volunteer study, consistently lower mean CoVs were observed in bilateral thigh muscles for RRS (9.3%) and ROS (9.2%) compared to LS (10.9%) and PS (10.2%), and the difference was more prominent at B0 offsets higher than 50 Hz. The proposed sampling schemes improve the reproducibility of quantitative T1ρ mapping by optimizing the selection of TSLs. This improvement is especially beneficial for longitudinal studies that track and monitor disease progression and treatment response.

show abstract

Cartilage compositional MRI—a narrative review of technical development and clinical applications over the past three decades

Li,

Kim,

Yang

et al. 2024

Skeletal Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Articular cartilage damage and degeneration are among hallmark manifestations of joint injuries and arthritis, classically osteoarthritis. Cartilage compositional MRI (Cart-C MRI), a quantitative technique, which aims to detect early-stage cartilage matrix changes that precede macroscopic alterations, began development in the 1990s. However, despite the significant advancements over the past three decades, Cart-C MRI remains predominantly a research tool, hindered by various technical and clinical hurdles. This paper will review the technical evolution of Cart-C MRI, delve into its clinical applications, and conclude by identifying the existing gaps and challenges that need to be addressed to enable even broader clinical application of Cart-C MRI.

show abstract

Reproducibility of T1ρ and T2 quantification in a multi-vendor multi-site study

Cited by 5 publications

References 15 publications

Repeatability of Quantitative Knee Cartilage T₁, T₂, and T_1ρ Mapping With 3D‐MRI Fingerprinting

Repeatability of Quantitative Knee Cartilage T₁, T₂, and T_1ρ Mapping With 3D‐MRI Fingerprinting

Novel spin‐lock time sampling strategies for improved reproducibility in quantitative T1ρ mapping

Cartilage compositional MRI—a narrative review of technical development and clinical applications over the past three decades

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Reproducibility of T1ρ and T2 quantification in a multi-vendor multi-site study

Cited by 5 publications

References 15 publications

Repeatability of Quantitative Knee Cartilage T1, T2, and T1ρ Mapping With 3D‐MRI Fingerprinting

Repeatability of Quantitative Knee Cartilage T1, T2, and T1ρ Mapping With 3D‐MRI Fingerprinting

Novel spin‐lock time sampling strategies for improved reproducibility in quantitative T1ρ mapping

Cartilage compositional MRI—a narrative review of technical development and clinical applications over the past three decades

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Repeatability of Quantitative Knee Cartilage T₁, T₂, and T_1ρ Mapping With 3D‐MRI Fingerprinting

Repeatability of Quantitative Knee Cartilage T₁, T₂, and T_1ρ Mapping With 3D‐MRI Fingerprinting