Quantitative imaging metrics derived from magnetic resonance fingerprinting using ISMRM/NIST MRI system phantom : An international multicenter repeatability and reproducibility study
© 2021 American Association of Physicists in Medicine..
PURPOSE: To compare the bias and inherent reliability of the quantitative (T1 and T2 ) imaging metrics generated from the magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF) technique using the ISMRM/NIST system phantom in an international multicenter setting.
METHOD: ISMRM/NIST MRI system phantom provides standard reference T1 and T2 relaxation values (vendor-provided) for each of the 14 vials in T1 and T2 arrays. MRF-SSFP scans repeated over 30 days on GE 1.5 and 3.0 T scanners at three collaborative centers. MRF estimated T1, and T2 values averaged over 30 days were compared with the phantom vendor-provided and spin-echo (SE) based convention gold standard (GS) method. Repeatability and reproducibility were characterized by the within-case coefficient of variation (wCV) of the MRF data acquired over 30 days, along with the biases.
RESULT: For the wide ranges of MRF estimated T1 values, vials #1-8 (T1 relaxation time between 2033 and 184 ms) exhibited a wCV less than 3% and 4%, respectively, on 3.0 and 1.5 T scanners. T2 values in vials #1-8 (T2 relaxation, 1044-45 ms) have shown wCV to be <7% on both 3.0 and 1.5 T scanners. A stronger linear correlation overall for T1 (R2 = 0.9960 and 0.9963 at center-1 and center-2 on 3.0 T scanner, and R2 = 0.9951 and 0.9988 at center-1 and center-3 on 1.5 T scanner) compared to T2 (R2 = 0.9971 and 0.9972 at center-1 and center-2 on 3.0 T scanner, and R2 = 0.9815 and 0.9754 at center-1 and center-3 on 1.5 T scanner). Bland-Altman (BA) analysis showed MRF based T1 and T2 values were within the limit of agreement (LOA) except for one data point. The mean difference or bias and 95% lower bound (LB) and upper bound (UB) LOA are reported in the format; mean bias: 95% LB LOA: 95% UB LOA. The biases for T1 values were 21.34: -50.00: 92.69, 21.32: -47.29: 89.94 ms, and for T2 values were -19.88: -42.37: 2.61, -19.06: -43.58: 5.45 ms on 3.0 T scanner at center-1 and center-2, respectively. Similarly, on 1.5 T scanner biases for T1 values were 26.54: -53.41: 106.50, 9.997: -51.94: 71.94 ms, and for T2 values were -23.84: -135.40: 87.76, -37.30: 134.30: 59.73 ms at center-1 and center-3, respectively. Additionally, the correlation between the SE based GS and MRF estimated T1 and T2 values (R2 = 0.9969 and 0.9977) showed a similar trend as we observed between vendor-provided and MRF estimated T1 and T2 values (R2 = 0.9963 and 0.9972). In addition to correlation, BA analysis showed that all the vials are within the LOA between the GS and vendor-provided for the T1 values and except one vial for T2 . All the vials are within the LOA between GS and MRF except one vial in T1 and T2 array. The wCV for reproducibility was <3% for both T1 and T2 values in vials #1-8, for all the 14 vials, wCV calculated for reproducibility was <4% for T1 values and <5% for T2.
CONCLUSION: This study shows that MRF is highly repeatable (wCV <4% for T1 and <7% for T2 ) and reproducible (wCV < 3% for both T1 and T2 ) in certain vials (vials #1-8).
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2021 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2021 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:48 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Medical physics - 48(2021), 5 vom: 15. Mai, Seite 2438-2447 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Shridhar Konar, Amaresha [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Journal Article |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 24.05.2021 Date Revised 18.07.2022 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1002/mp.14833 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM322480132 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM322480132 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231225182128.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231225s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1002/mp.14833 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1074.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM322480132 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)33690905 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Shridhar Konar, Amaresha |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Quantitative imaging metrics derived from magnetic resonance fingerprinting using ISMRM/NIST MRI system phantom |b An international multicenter repeatability and reproducibility study |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 24.05.2021 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 18.07.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2021 American Association of Physicists in Medicine. | ||
| 520 | |a PURPOSE: To compare the bias and inherent reliability of the quantitative (T1 and T2 ) imaging metrics generated from the magnetic resonance fingerprinting (MRF) technique using the ISMRM/NIST system phantom in an international multicenter setting | ||
| 520 | |a METHOD: ISMRM/NIST MRI system phantom provides standard reference T1 and T2 relaxation values (vendor-provided) for each of the 14 vials in T1 and T2 arrays. MRF-SSFP scans repeated over 30 days on GE 1.5 and 3.0 T scanners at three collaborative centers. MRF estimated T1, and T2 values averaged over 30 days were compared with the phantom vendor-provided and spin-echo (SE) based convention gold standard (GS) method. Repeatability and reproducibility were characterized by the within-case coefficient of variation (wCV) of the MRF data acquired over 30 days, along with the biases | ||
| 520 | |a RESULT: For the wide ranges of MRF estimated T1 values, vials #1-8 (T1 relaxation time between 2033 and 184 ms) exhibited a wCV less than 3% and 4%, respectively, on 3.0 and 1.5 T scanners. T2 values in vials #1-8 (T2 relaxation, 1044-45 ms) have shown wCV to be <7% on both 3.0 and 1.5 T scanners. A stronger linear correlation overall for T1 (R2 = 0.9960 and 0.9963 at center-1 and center-2 on 3.0 T scanner, and R2 = 0.9951 and 0.9988 at center-1 and center-3 on 1.5 T scanner) compared to T2 (R2 = 0.9971 and 0.9972 at center-1 and center-2 on 3.0 T scanner, and R2 = 0.9815 and 0.9754 at center-1 and center-3 on 1.5 T scanner). Bland-Altman (BA) analysis showed MRF based T1 and T2 values were within the limit of agreement (LOA) except for one data point. The mean difference or bias and 95% lower bound (LB) and upper bound (UB) LOA are reported in the format; mean bias: 95% LB LOA: 95% UB LOA. The biases for T1 values were 21.34: -50.00: 92.69, 21.32: -47.29: 89.94 ms, and for T2 values were -19.88: -42.37: 2.61, -19.06: -43.58: 5.45 ms on 3.0 T scanner at center-1 and center-2, respectively. Similarly, on 1.5 T scanner biases for T1 values were 26.54: -53.41: 106.50, 9.997: -51.94: 71.94 ms, and for T2 values were -23.84: -135.40: 87.76, -37.30: 134.30: 59.73 ms at center-1 and center-3, respectively. Additionally, the correlation between the SE based GS and MRF estimated T1 and T2 values (R2 = 0.9969 and 0.9977) showed a similar trend as we observed between vendor-provided and MRF estimated T1 and T2 values (R2 = 0.9963 and 0.9972). In addition to correlation, BA analysis showed that all the vials are within the LOA between the GS and vendor-provided for the T1 values and except one vial for T2 . All the vials are within the LOA between GS and MRF except one vial in T1 and T2 array. The wCV for reproducibility was <3% for both T1 and T2 values in vials #1-8, for all the 14 vials, wCV calculated for reproducibility was <4% for T1 values and <5% for T2 | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: This study shows that MRF is highly repeatable (wCV <4% for T1 and <7% for T2 ) and reproducible (wCV < 3% for both T1 and T2 ) in certain vials (vials #1-8) | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Multicenter Study | |
| 650 | 4 | |a T1 and T2 relaxation | |
| 650 | 4 | |a multicenter study | |
| 650 | 4 | |a quantitative MRI | |
| 650 | 4 | |a quantitative imaging biomarker | |
| 650 | 4 | |a repeatability | |
| 650 | 4 | |a reproducibility | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Qian, Enlin |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Geethanath, Sairam |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Buonincontri, Guido |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Obuchowski, Nancy A |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Fung, Maggie |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gomez, Pedro |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Schulte, Rolf |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Cencini, Matteo |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Tosetti, Michela |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Schwartz, Lawrence H |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Shukla-Dave, Amita |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Medical physics |d 1974 |g 48(2021), 5 vom: 15. Mai, Seite 2438-2447 |w (DE-627)NLM000294748 |x 2473-4209 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:48 |g year:2021 |g number:5 |g day:15 |g month:05 |g pages:2438-2447 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mp.14833 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 48 |j 2021 |e 5 |b 15 |c 05 |h 2438-2447 | ||