Get access

Comparison of R2* correction methods for accurate fat quantification in fatty liver

Authors

  • Debra E. Horng MS,

    1. Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    2. Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Diego Hernando PhD,

    1. Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Catherine D.G. Hines PhD,

    1. Merck Research Laboratories, West Point, Pennsylvania, USA
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Scott B. Reeder MD, PhD

    Corresponding author
    1. Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    2. Department of Medical Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    3. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    4. Department Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    • Department of Radiology, E1/374 CSC, University of Wisconsin, 600 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI 53792-3252
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

Purpose:

To compare the performance of fat fraction quantification using single-R2* and dual-R2* correction methods in patients with fatty liver, using MR spectroscopy (MRS) as the reference standard.

Materials and Methods:

From a group of 97 patients, 32 patients with hepatic fat fraction greater than 5%, as measured by MRS, were identified. In these patients, chemical shift encoded fat-water imaging was performed, covering the entire liver in a single breathhold. Fat fraction was measured from the imaging data by postprocessing using 6 different models: single- and dual-R2* correction, each performed with complex fitting, magnitude fitting, and mixed magnitude/complex fitting to compare the effects of phase error correction. Fat fraction measurements were compared with co-registered spectroscopy measurements using linear regression.

Results:

Linear regression demonstrated higher agreement with MRS using single-R2* correction compared with dual-R2* correction. Among single-R2* models, all 3 fittings methods performed similarly well (slope = 1.0 ± 0.06, r2 = 0.89–0.91).

Conclusion:

Single-R2* modeling is more accurate than dual-R2* modeling for hepatic fat quantification in patients, even in those with high hepatic fat concentrations. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2013;37:414–422. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Get access to the full text of this article

Ancillary