MRI-based quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) and R2* mapping of liver iron overload Comparison with SQUID-based biomagnetic liver susceptometry
Standard
MRI-based quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) and R2* mapping of liver iron overload Comparison with SQUID-based biomagnetic liver susceptometry. / Sharma, Samir D; Fischer, Roland; Schoennagel, Bjoern P; Nielsen, Peter; Kooijman, Hendrik; Yamamura, Jin; Adam, Gerhard; Bannas, Peter; Hernando, Diego; Reeder, Scott B.
in: MAGN RESON MED, Jahrgang 78, Nr. 1, 07.2017, S. 264-270.Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/Zeitung › SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz › Forschung › Begutachtung
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - MRI-based quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) and R2* mapping of liver iron overload Comparison with SQUID-based biomagnetic liver susceptometry
AU - Sharma, Samir D
AU - Fischer, Roland
AU - Schoennagel, Bjoern P
AU - Nielsen, Peter
AU - Kooijman, Hendrik
AU - Yamamura, Jin
AU - Adam, Gerhard
AU - Bannas, Peter
AU - Hernando, Diego
AU - Reeder, Scott B
N1 - © 2016 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.
PY - 2017/7
Y1 - 2017/7
N2 - PURPOSE: We aimed to determine the agreement between quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM)-based biomagnetic liver susceptometry (BLS) and confounder-corrected R2* mapping with superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID)-based biomagnetic liver susceptometry in patients with liver iron overload.METHODS: Data were acquired from two healthy controls and 22 patients undergoing MRI and SQUID-BLS as part of routine monitoring for iron overload. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed on a 3T system using a three-dimensional multi-echo gradient-echo acquisition. Both magnetic susceptibility and R2* of the liver were estimated from this acquisition. Linear regression was used to compare estimates of QSM-BLS and R2* to SQUID-BLS.RESULTS: Both QSM-BLS and confounder-corrected R2* were sensitive to the presence of iron in the liver. Linear regression between QSM-BLS and SQUID-BLS demonstrated the following relationship: QSM-BLS = (-0.22 ± 0.11) + (0.49 ± 0.05) · SQUID-BLS with r(2) = 0.88. The coefficient of determination between liver R2* and SQUID-BLS was also r(2) = 0.88.CONCLUSION: We determined a strong correlation between both QSM-BLS and confounder-corrected R2* to SQUID-BLS. This study demonstrates the feasibility of QSM-BLS and confounder-corrected R2* for assessing liver iron overload, particularly when SQUID systems are not accessible. Magn Reson Med, 2016. © 2016 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.
AB - PURPOSE: We aimed to determine the agreement between quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM)-based biomagnetic liver susceptometry (BLS) and confounder-corrected R2* mapping with superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID)-based biomagnetic liver susceptometry in patients with liver iron overload.METHODS: Data were acquired from two healthy controls and 22 patients undergoing MRI and SQUID-BLS as part of routine monitoring for iron overload. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed on a 3T system using a three-dimensional multi-echo gradient-echo acquisition. Both magnetic susceptibility and R2* of the liver were estimated from this acquisition. Linear regression was used to compare estimates of QSM-BLS and R2* to SQUID-BLS.RESULTS: Both QSM-BLS and confounder-corrected R2* were sensitive to the presence of iron in the liver. Linear regression between QSM-BLS and SQUID-BLS demonstrated the following relationship: QSM-BLS = (-0.22 ± 0.11) + (0.49 ± 0.05) · SQUID-BLS with r(2) = 0.88. The coefficient of determination between liver R2* and SQUID-BLS was also r(2) = 0.88.CONCLUSION: We determined a strong correlation between both QSM-BLS and confounder-corrected R2* to SQUID-BLS. This study demonstrates the feasibility of QSM-BLS and confounder-corrected R2* for assessing liver iron overload, particularly when SQUID systems are not accessible. Magn Reson Med, 2016. © 2016 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.
U2 - 10.1002/mrm.26358
DO - 10.1002/mrm.26358
M3 - SCORING: Journal article
C2 - 27509836
VL - 78
SP - 264
EP - 270
JO - MAGN RESON MED
JF - MAGN RESON MED
SN - 0740-3194
IS - 1
ER -