Experimental study on early diagnosis of liver fibrosis using multi?parametric MRI
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1005?1201.2019.10.021
- VernacularTitle:MR多参数成像诊断肝纤维化分期的价值
- Author:
Hao ZHANG
1
;
Liqiu ZOU
;
Kai ZHANG
;
Wenxin ZHONG
;
Hui GAO
;
Shoufang YAN
Author Information
1. 深圳市南山区人民医院放射科518052
- Keywords:
Liver fibrosis;
Magnetic resonance elastography;
Susceptibility?weighted imaging
- From:
Chinese Journal of Radiology
2019;53(10):900-904
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To assess diagnostic performance of multi?parametric MRI including MR elastography (MRE), susceptibility?weighted imaging (SWI) and T1ρ imaging in detecting the early stage of liver fibrosis (LF). Methods Eighty healthy rabbits were randomly divided into LF group (n=60) and control group (n=20). The LF group (n=12) and control group (n=5) were randomly selected at the end of the 4th, 5th, 6th, 15th week after injection of 50% CCl4 oil solution, respectively. All rabbits underwent 3.0 T MRI scans and histopathological Scheuer staging. Differences between groups were examined using one?way analysis of variance with Dunnett's T3 test. Spearman correlation was used to analyze the correlation between liver stiffness (LS), liver?to?muscle SI ratio (SIR), T1ρ value in different LF stages. ROC curve analysis was used to assess the diagnostic performance. Results Fifty?five rabbits were included in our study, which covered F0 (n=14), F1 (n=11), F2 (n=10), F3 (n=9) and F4 (n=11). Significant differences of all characteristic values were found among different LF stages (P<0.05).There were significant differences in LS values between F0 and F2, F3, F4, respectively; F1 and F3, F4, respectively; F2 and F4; F3 and F4 (P<0.05). There were significant differences in SIR between F0 and F2, F3, F4, respectively; F1 and F2, F3, F4, respectively; F2 and F4 (P<0.05). T1ρ value showed significant differences between F0, F1, F2, F3 and F4, respectively (P<0.05). LS, SIR, and T1ρ values were correlated with LF stage (r=0.910, -0.808, 0.512, respectively, P<0.01). The area under curve (AUC) for LS value were greater than those for the other two methods (0.953 for≥F1, 0.949 for≥F2, 0.986 for≥F3, 0.979 for F4). The AUCs of the combination of MRE and SWI for detecting≥F1 was 0.965, for≥F2 was 0.983, for≥F3 was 0.991, and for F4 was 0.950. Combining all three MR methods showed the highest diagnostic performance for staging LF with AUCs of 0.969, 0.985, 0.996 and 1.000.Conclusion MRE is the most prominent MRI method, and combination of MRE and SWI show higher diagnostic performance than the others for staging LF; however, combining all three MR methods exhibits the most excellent diagnostic efficacy.
