Premium
Comparison of readout‐segmented and conventional single‐shot for echo‐planar diffusion‐weighted imaging in the assessment of kidney interstitial fibrosis
Author(s) -
Friedli Iris,
Crowe Lindsey Alexandra,
de Perrot Thomas,
Berchtold Lena,
Martin PierreYves,
de Seigneux Sophie,
Vallée JeanPaul
Publication year - 2017
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.25687
Subject(s) - effective diffusion coefficient , medicine , fibrosis , imaging phantom , nuclear medicine , echo planar imaging , diffusion mri , flip angle , correlation coefficient , correlation , coefficient of variation , nuclear magnetic resonance , pathology , magnetic resonance imaging , radiology , mathematics , physics , statistics , geometry
Purpose To compare readout‐segmented echo‐planar imaging (EPI) (RESOLVE) to single‐shot EPI (ss‐EPI) diffusion‐weighted imaging (DWI) for the assessment of renal interstitial fibrosis. Materials and Methods A phantom, eight healthy volunteers (under 30 years to avoid age‐fibrosis related) and 27 chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients (scheduled for kidney biopsy) were scanned (at 3T) with ss‐EPI and 5‐shot RESOLVE DWI (resolution: 2 × 2 × 5 mm 3 , 10 b‐values). The cortico‐medullary difference for each DW parameter from a monoexponential fit (ΔADC) or, segmented biexponential fit (ΔD, ΔD*, ΔF p ) were compared between both sequences. A fibrosis threshold of 40% was defined to separate all 35 subjects into low and high fibrosis groups. The linear relationship between DW parameters and percentage fibrosis (up to 80%) from Masson trichrome was assessed with the Pearson product‐moment correlation coefficient. Fisher Z‐transform was used for R 2 correlation comparison. Results A coefficient of variation between ADCs of 3% was measured between both sequences in the phantom. In healthy volunteers, no significant difference was measured for all DW parameters. Both sequences separated low to high level of fibrosis with a significant decrease of ΔADC (RESOLVE P = 3.1 × 10 ‐6 , ss‐EPI P = 0.003) and ΔD (RESOLVE P = 8.2 × 10 ‐5 , ss‐EPI P = 0.02) in the high level of fibrosis. However, RESOLVE ΔADC had a stronger negative correlation ( P = 0.04 for R 2 comparison) with fibrosis than ss‐EPI ΔADC (RESOLVE R 2 = 0.65, P = 5.9 × 10 ‐9 , ss‐EPI R 2 = 0.29, P = 8.9 × 10 ‐4 ). ΔD (RESOLVE) was correlated (moderately) with fibrosis (R 2 = 0.29, P = 9.2 × 10 ‐4 ); however, ΔD* and ΔF p did not show, in our population, a significant correlation with interstitial fibrosis (0.01 < R 2 < 0.08). Conclusion ΔADC derived from both sequences correlated with fibrosis. ΔADC from RESOLVE showed better correlation with fibrosis than ΔADC from ss‐EPI and therefore has potential to monitor CKD. Level of Evidence: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;46:1631–1640.