TY - JOUR
T1 - Reproducibility of DCE-MRI time-intensity curve-shape analysis in patients with knee arthritis: A comparison with qualitative and pharmacokinetic analyses
AU - van der Leij, Christiaan
AU - Lavini, Cristina
AU - van de Sande, Marleen G. H.
AU - de Hair, Marjolein J. H.
AU - Wijffels, Christophe
AU - Maas, Mario
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - To compare the between-session reproducibility of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) combined with time-intensity curve (TIC)-shape analysis in arthritis patients, within one scanner and between two different scanners, and to compare this method with qualitative analysis and pharmacokinetic modeling (PKM). Fifteen knee joint arthritis patients were included and scanned twice on a closed-bore 1.5T scanner (n = 9, group 1), or on a closed-bore 1.5T and on an open-bore 1.0T scanner (n = 6, group 2). DCE-MRI data were postprocessed using in-house developed software ("Dynamo"). Disease activity was assessed. Disease activity was comparable between the two visits. In group 1 qualitative analysis showed the highest reproducibility with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) between 0.78 and 0.98 and root mean square-coefficients of variation (RMS-CoV) of 8.0%-14.9%. TIC-shape analysis showed a slightly lower reproducibility with similar ICCs (0.78-0.97) but higher RMS-CoV (18.3%-42.9%). The PKM analysis showed the lowest reproducibility with ICCs between 0.39 and 0.64 (RMS-CoV 21.5%-51.9%). In group 2 TIC-shape analysis of the two most important TIC-shape types showed the highest reproducibility with ICCs of 0.78 and 0.71 (RMS-CoV 29.8% and 59.4%) and outperformed the reproducibility of the most important qualitative parameter (ICC 0.31, RMS-CoV 45.1%) and the within-scanner reproducibility of PKM analysis. TIC-shape analysis is a robust postprocessing method within one scanner, almost as reproducible as the qualitative analysis. Between scanners, the reproducibility of the most important TIC-shapes outperform that of the most important qualitative parameter and the within-scanner reproducibility of PKM analysis
AB - To compare the between-session reproducibility of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) combined with time-intensity curve (TIC)-shape analysis in arthritis patients, within one scanner and between two different scanners, and to compare this method with qualitative analysis and pharmacokinetic modeling (PKM). Fifteen knee joint arthritis patients were included and scanned twice on a closed-bore 1.5T scanner (n = 9, group 1), or on a closed-bore 1.5T and on an open-bore 1.0T scanner (n = 6, group 2). DCE-MRI data were postprocessed using in-house developed software ("Dynamo"). Disease activity was assessed. Disease activity was comparable between the two visits. In group 1 qualitative analysis showed the highest reproducibility with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) between 0.78 and 0.98 and root mean square-coefficients of variation (RMS-CoV) of 8.0%-14.9%. TIC-shape analysis showed a slightly lower reproducibility with similar ICCs (0.78-0.97) but higher RMS-CoV (18.3%-42.9%). The PKM analysis showed the lowest reproducibility with ICCs between 0.39 and 0.64 (RMS-CoV 21.5%-51.9%). In group 2 TIC-shape analysis of the two most important TIC-shape types showed the highest reproducibility with ICCs of 0.78 and 0.71 (RMS-CoV 29.8% and 59.4%) and outperformed the reproducibility of the most important qualitative parameter (ICC 0.31, RMS-CoV 45.1%) and the within-scanner reproducibility of PKM analysis. TIC-shape analysis is a robust postprocessing method within one scanner, almost as reproducible as the qualitative analysis. Between scanners, the reproducibility of the most important TIC-shapes outperform that of the most important qualitative parameter and the within-scanner reproducibility of PKM analysis
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24933
DO - https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24933
M3 - Article
C2 - 25929459
SN - 1053-1807
VL - 42
SP - 1497
EP - 1506
JO - Journal of magnetic resonance imaging
JF - Journal of magnetic resonance imaging
IS - 6
ER -