Premium
Modeling DCE‐MRI at low temporal resolution: A case study on rheumatoid arthritis
Author(s) -
Ledsam Joseph R.,
Hodgson Richard,
Moots Robert J.,
Sourbron Steven P.
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
journal of magnetic resonance imaging
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.563
H-Index - 160
eISSN - 1522-2586
pISSN - 1053-1807
DOI - 10.1002/jmri.24061
Subject(s) - magnetic resonance imaging , temporal resolution , rheumatoid arthritis , dynamic contrast enhanced mri , nuclear medicine , medicine , computer science , biomedical engineering , radiology , physics , quantum mechanics
Purpose To identify the optimal tracer‐kinetic modeling strategy for dynamic contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE‐MRI) data acquired at low temporal resolution. Materials and Methods DCE‐MRI was performed on 13 patients with rheumatoid arthritis of the hand before and after anti‐tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) therapy, using a 3D sequence with a temporal resolution of 13 seconds, imaging for 4 minutes postcontrast injection. Concentration–time curves were extracted from regions of interest (ROIs) in enhancing synovium and fitted to the 3‐parameter modified Tofts model (MT) and the 4‐parameter two‐compartment exchange model (2CXM). To assist the interpretation of the data, the same analysis was applied to simulated data with similar characteristics. Results Both models fitted the data closely, and showed similar therapy effects. The MT plasma volume was significantly lower than with 2CXM, but the differences in permeability and interstitial volume were not significant. 2CXM was less precise than MT, with larger standard deviations relative to the mean in most parameters. The additional perfusion parameter determined with 2CXM did not provide a statistically significant trend due to low precision. Conclusion The standard MT model is the optimal modeling strategy at low temporal resolution. Advanced models improve the accuracy and generate an additional parameter, but these benefits are offset by low precision. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2013;38:1554–1563. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.