Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Validity of apparent diffusion coefficient hyperpolarized He-3-MRI using MSCT and pulmonary function tests as references

Diaz, Sandra LU ; Casselbrant, Ingrid LU ; Piitulainen, Eeva LU ; Magnusson, Peter ; Peterson, Barry ; Wollmer, Per LU ; Leander, Peter LU ; Ekberg, Olle LU and Åkeson, Per LU (2009) In European Journal of Radiology 71(2). p.257-263
Abstract
Purpose: To compare apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements from hyperpolarized (HP) helium (He-3)-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with quantitative data from multislice Computed Tomography (CT) (MSCT) of the whole lungs and pulmonary function tests (PFT). Materials and methods: Twenty-seven subjects, 22 with established emphysema and 5 with preclinical emphysema defined by PFT criteria, were examined with Hp He-3-MRI and MSCT. Mean age was 55 (+/- 12) years, 18 female and 9 male. Mean ADC from He-3-MRI was compared with emphysema index (EI), 15th percentile and mean lung density (MLD) values from MSCT. Both mean ADC and MSCT data were compared to PFT, especially percent of predicted diffusing capacity of carbon monoxide... (More)
Purpose: To compare apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements from hyperpolarized (HP) helium (He-3)-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with quantitative data from multislice Computed Tomography (CT) (MSCT) of the whole lungs and pulmonary function tests (PFT). Materials and methods: Twenty-seven subjects, 22 with established emphysema and 5 with preclinical emphysema defined by PFT criteria, were examined with Hp He-3-MRI and MSCT. Mean age was 55 (+/- 12) years, 18 female and 9 male. Mean ADC from He-3-MRI was compared with emphysema index (EI), 15th percentile and mean lung density (MLD) values from MSCT. Both mean ADC and MSCT data were compared to PFT, especially percent of predicted diffusing capacity of carbon monoxide (%predicted DLCO), using Pearson's correlation test. Results: Mean ADC and standard deviation values were 0.392 +/- 0.119 cm(2)/s for the established emphysema group and 0.216 +/- 0.046 for the pre-clinical emphysema group. MSCT values for the established emphysema group and pre-clinical emphysema group were: EI (%) 11 +/- 12 and 0.4 +/- 0.6, respectively; 15th percentile (Hounsfield Units (HU)), -956 +/- 25 and -933 +/- 13, respectively and MLD (HU) -877 +/- 20 and -863 +/- 15, respectively. Correlations between mean ADC and El and 15th percentile were both r=0.90 and for MLD r=0.59. There was higher correlation between mean ADC and %predicted DLCO (r=0.90) than between El and %predicted DLCO (r=0.76). Conclusion: Hp He-3-MRI correlates well with density measurements from MSCT and agrees better than MSCT with %predicted DLCO which is the PFT most related to emphysema. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; ; ; ; ; ; and
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Multislice computed tomography, imaging, Magnetic resonance, Apparent diffusion coefficient, Hyperpolarized He-3, Pulmonary function test, Emphysema
in
European Journal of Radiology
volume
71
issue
2
pages
257 - 263
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • wos:000269425500014
  • pmid:18514455
  • scopus:67651229631
ISSN
1872-7727
DOI
10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.04.013
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
7013d42c-c06e-457e-b773-bdc1b35ccc3b (old id 1476408)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18514455?dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2016-04-01 12:04:50
date last changed
2023-09-01 18:41:06
@article{7013d42c-c06e-457e-b773-bdc1b35ccc3b,
  abstract     = {{Purpose: To compare apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements from hyperpolarized (HP) helium (He-3)-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with quantitative data from multislice Computed Tomography (CT) (MSCT) of the whole lungs and pulmonary function tests (PFT). Materials and methods: Twenty-seven subjects, 22 with established emphysema and 5 with preclinical emphysema defined by PFT criteria, were examined with Hp He-3-MRI and MSCT. Mean age was 55 (+/- 12) years, 18 female and 9 male. Mean ADC from He-3-MRI was compared with emphysema index (EI), 15th percentile and mean lung density (MLD) values from MSCT. Both mean ADC and MSCT data were compared to PFT, especially percent of predicted diffusing capacity of carbon monoxide (%predicted DLCO), using Pearson's correlation test. Results: Mean ADC and standard deviation values were 0.392 +/- 0.119 cm(2)/s for the established emphysema group and 0.216 +/- 0.046 for the pre-clinical emphysema group. MSCT values for the established emphysema group and pre-clinical emphysema group were: EI (%) 11 +/- 12 and 0.4 +/- 0.6, respectively; 15th percentile (Hounsfield Units (HU)), -956 +/- 25 and -933 +/- 13, respectively and MLD (HU) -877 +/- 20 and -863 +/- 15, respectively. Correlations between mean ADC and El and 15th percentile were both r=0.90 and for MLD r=0.59. There was higher correlation between mean ADC and %predicted DLCO (r=0.90) than between El and %predicted DLCO (r=0.76). Conclusion: Hp He-3-MRI correlates well with density measurements from MSCT and agrees better than MSCT with %predicted DLCO which is the PFT most related to emphysema. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.}},
  author       = {{Diaz, Sandra and Casselbrant, Ingrid and Piitulainen, Eeva and Magnusson, Peter and Peterson, Barry and Wollmer, Per and Leander, Peter and Ekberg, Olle and Åkeson, Per}},
  issn         = {{1872-7727}},
  keywords     = {{Multislice computed tomography; imaging; Magnetic resonance; Apparent diffusion coefficient; Hyperpolarized He-3; Pulmonary function test; Emphysema}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{2}},
  pages        = {{257--263}},
  publisher    = {{Elsevier}},
  series       = {{European Journal of Radiology}},
  title        = {{Validity of apparent diffusion coefficient hyperpolarized He-3-MRI using MSCT and pulmonary function tests as references}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.04.013}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.04.013}},
  volume       = {{71}},
  year         = {{2009}},
}