Agreement and reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements of dual-b-value and multi-b-value diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 tesla in phantom and in soft tissues of the abdomen

Celia Corona Villalobos, Li Pan, Vivek Gowdra Halappa, Susanne Bonekamp, Christine H. Lorenz, John Eng, Ihab R Kamel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the coefficient of variation (CV) and long-term reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in a simple fluid-filled phantom and abdominal organs simultaneously. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective institutional review board-approved and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study sequentially selected 100 patients who underwent clinically indicated abdominal magnetic resonance imaging. A subset of 58 patients had repeat scans within 2 to 5 months after the initial magnetic resonance imaging. Two diffusion-weighted imaging techniques (b-values 0-750 mm/s) were performed to compare the ADC values. Mean ADC values were calculated for 10 locations and the reference phantom. The CV and Bland-Altman plots were calculated for the phantom and soft tissues at each session and location. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the mean ADC values between repeated acquisitions. However, ADC values were statistically higher using dual-b-value than multi-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging. The CV for the phantom was 8.6 versus 10.8 for dual-b-value and multi-b-value, respectively. The CVs for the soft tissues had a wider range compared with that of the phantom (liver, 12.6 vs 9.0; spleen, 11.7 vs 11.2; gallbladder, 11.0 vs 13.6; head of pancreas, 14.6 vs 14.7; body of pancreas, 13.4 vs 13.0; tail of pancreas, 14.8 vs 16.3; right kidney, 9.1 vs 9.6; left kidney, 9.3 vs 9.3; right paraspinal muscle, 7.9 vs 7.5; left paraspinal muscle, 7.3 vs 7.3, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: A change in ADC less than 11% falls into the range of measurement variability. Paraspinal muscle could potentially be used as an internal reference parameter.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)46-51
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Computer Assisted Tomography
Volume37
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2013

Fingerprint

Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Abdomen
Paraspinal Muscles
Pancreas
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
Kidney
Research Ethics Committees
Gallbladder
Spleen
Liver

Keywords

  • abdominal imaging
  • apparent diffusion coefficient
  • diffusion-weighted imaging
  • phantom

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

@article{48901908f97d40b1873b8aa22f59e706,
title = "Agreement and reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements of dual-b-value and multi-b-value diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 tesla in phantom and in soft tissues of the abdomen",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To compare the coefficient of variation (CV) and long-term reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in a simple fluid-filled phantom and abdominal organs simultaneously. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective institutional review board-approved and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study sequentially selected 100 patients who underwent clinically indicated abdominal magnetic resonance imaging. A subset of 58 patients had repeat scans within 2 to 5 months after the initial magnetic resonance imaging. Two diffusion-weighted imaging techniques (b-values 0-750 mm/s) were performed to compare the ADC values. Mean ADC values were calculated for 10 locations and the reference phantom. The CV and Bland-Altman plots were calculated for the phantom and soft tissues at each session and location. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the mean ADC values between repeated acquisitions. However, ADC values were statistically higher using dual-b-value than multi-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging. The CV for the phantom was 8.6 versus 10.8 for dual-b-value and multi-b-value, respectively. The CVs for the soft tissues had a wider range compared with that of the phantom (liver, 12.6 vs 9.0; spleen, 11.7 vs 11.2; gallbladder, 11.0 vs 13.6; head of pancreas, 14.6 vs 14.7; body of pancreas, 13.4 vs 13.0; tail of pancreas, 14.8 vs 16.3; right kidney, 9.1 vs 9.6; left kidney, 9.3 vs 9.3; right paraspinal muscle, 7.9 vs 7.5; left paraspinal muscle, 7.3 vs 7.3, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: A change in ADC less than 11{\%} falls into the range of measurement variability. Paraspinal muscle could potentially be used as an internal reference parameter.",
keywords = "abdominal imaging, apparent diffusion coefficient, diffusion-weighted imaging, phantom",
author = "{Corona Villalobos}, Celia and Li Pan and Halappa, {Vivek Gowdra} and Susanne Bonekamp and Lorenz, {Christine H.} and John Eng and Kamel, {Ihab R}",
year = "2013",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1097/RCT.0b013e3182720e07",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "37",
pages = "46--51",
journal = "Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography",
issn = "0363-8715",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Agreement and reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements of dual-b-value and multi-b-value diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 tesla in phantom and in soft tissues of the abdomen

AU - Corona Villalobos, Celia

AU - Pan, Li

AU - Halappa, Vivek Gowdra

AU - Bonekamp, Susanne

AU - Lorenz, Christine H.

AU - Eng, John

AU - Kamel, Ihab R

PY - 2013/1

Y1 - 2013/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To compare the coefficient of variation (CV) and long-term reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in a simple fluid-filled phantom and abdominal organs simultaneously. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective institutional review board-approved and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study sequentially selected 100 patients who underwent clinically indicated abdominal magnetic resonance imaging. A subset of 58 patients had repeat scans within 2 to 5 months after the initial magnetic resonance imaging. Two diffusion-weighted imaging techniques (b-values 0-750 mm/s) were performed to compare the ADC values. Mean ADC values were calculated for 10 locations and the reference phantom. The CV and Bland-Altman plots were calculated for the phantom and soft tissues at each session and location. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the mean ADC values between repeated acquisitions. However, ADC values were statistically higher using dual-b-value than multi-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging. The CV for the phantom was 8.6 versus 10.8 for dual-b-value and multi-b-value, respectively. The CVs for the soft tissues had a wider range compared with that of the phantom (liver, 12.6 vs 9.0; spleen, 11.7 vs 11.2; gallbladder, 11.0 vs 13.6; head of pancreas, 14.6 vs 14.7; body of pancreas, 13.4 vs 13.0; tail of pancreas, 14.8 vs 16.3; right kidney, 9.1 vs 9.6; left kidney, 9.3 vs 9.3; right paraspinal muscle, 7.9 vs 7.5; left paraspinal muscle, 7.3 vs 7.3, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: A change in ADC less than 11% falls into the range of measurement variability. Paraspinal muscle could potentially be used as an internal reference parameter.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To compare the coefficient of variation (CV) and long-term reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in a simple fluid-filled phantom and abdominal organs simultaneously. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective institutional review board-approved and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study sequentially selected 100 patients who underwent clinically indicated abdominal magnetic resonance imaging. A subset of 58 patients had repeat scans within 2 to 5 months after the initial magnetic resonance imaging. Two diffusion-weighted imaging techniques (b-values 0-750 mm/s) were performed to compare the ADC values. Mean ADC values were calculated for 10 locations and the reference phantom. The CV and Bland-Altman plots were calculated for the phantom and soft tissues at each session and location. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the mean ADC values between repeated acquisitions. However, ADC values were statistically higher using dual-b-value than multi-b-value diffusion-weighted imaging. The CV for the phantom was 8.6 versus 10.8 for dual-b-value and multi-b-value, respectively. The CVs for the soft tissues had a wider range compared with that of the phantom (liver, 12.6 vs 9.0; spleen, 11.7 vs 11.2; gallbladder, 11.0 vs 13.6; head of pancreas, 14.6 vs 14.7; body of pancreas, 13.4 vs 13.0; tail of pancreas, 14.8 vs 16.3; right kidney, 9.1 vs 9.6; left kidney, 9.3 vs 9.3; right paraspinal muscle, 7.9 vs 7.5; left paraspinal muscle, 7.3 vs 7.3, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: A change in ADC less than 11% falls into the range of measurement variability. Paraspinal muscle could potentially be used as an internal reference parameter.

KW - abdominal imaging

KW - apparent diffusion coefficient

KW - diffusion-weighted imaging

KW - phantom

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84872976386&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84872976386&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/RCT.0b013e3182720e07

DO - 10.1097/RCT.0b013e3182720e07

M3 - Article

C2 - 23321832

AN - SCOPUS:84872976386

VL - 37

SP - 46

EP - 51

JO - Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

JF - Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

SN - 0363-8715

IS - 1

ER -