Advanced

Quantification of low fat contents: a comparison of MR imaging and spectroscopy methods at 1.5 and 3 T.

Månsson, Sven; Peterson, Pernilla LU and Johansson, Edvin (2012) In Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Abstract
Magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) has long been considered the golden standard for non-invasive measurement of tissue fat content. With improved techniques for fat/water separation, imaging has become an alternative to MRS for fat quantification. Several imaging models have been proposed, but their performance relative to MRS at very low fat contents is yet not fully established. In this work, imaging and spectroscopy were compared at 1.5 T and 3 T in phantoms with 0-3% fat fraction (FF). We propose a multispectral model with individual a priori R(2) relaxation rates for water and fat, and a common unknown R(2)' relaxation. Magnitude and complex image reconstructions were also compared. Best accuracy was obtained with the imaging... (More)
Magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) has long been considered the golden standard for non-invasive measurement of tissue fat content. With improved techniques for fat/water separation, imaging has become an alternative to MRS for fat quantification. Several imaging models have been proposed, but their performance relative to MRS at very low fat contents is yet not fully established. In this work, imaging and spectroscopy were compared at 1.5 T and 3 T in phantoms with 0-3% fat fraction (FF). We propose a multispectral model with individual a priori R(2) relaxation rates for water and fat, and a common unknown R(2)' relaxation. Magnitude and complex image reconstructions were also compared. Best accuracy was obtained with the imaging method at 1.5 T. At 3 T, the FFs were underestimated due to larger fat-water phase shifts. Agreement between measured and true FF was excellent for the imaging method at 1.5 T (imaging: FF(meas)=0.98 FF(true)-0.01%, spectroscopy: FF(meas)=0.77 FF(true)+0.08%), and fair at 3 T (imaging: FF(meas)=0.91 FF(true)-0.19%, spectroscopy: FF(meas)=0.79 FF(true)+0.02%). The imaging method was able to quantify FFs down to approx. 0.5%. We conclude that the suggested imaging model is capable of fat quantification with accuracy and precision similar to or better than spectroscopy and offers an improvement vs. a model with a common R(2)* relaxation only. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • wos:000311261000013
  • pmid:22835942
  • scopus:84868646885
ISSN
1873-5894
DOI
10.1016/j.mri.2012.04.023
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
acc53216-ab0f-4fc1-bd15-1c4522759e87 (old id 2966520)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22835942?dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2012-08-10 09:34:51
date last changed
2017-02-26 04:22:36
@article{acc53216-ab0f-4fc1-bd15-1c4522759e87,
  abstract     = {Magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) has long been considered the golden standard for non-invasive measurement of tissue fat content. With improved techniques for fat/water separation, imaging has become an alternative to MRS for fat quantification. Several imaging models have been proposed, but their performance relative to MRS at very low fat contents is yet not fully established. In this work, imaging and spectroscopy were compared at 1.5 T and 3 T in phantoms with 0-3% fat fraction (FF). We propose a multispectral model with individual a priori R(2) relaxation rates for water and fat, and a common unknown R(2)' relaxation. Magnitude and complex image reconstructions were also compared. Best accuracy was obtained with the imaging method at 1.5 T. At 3 T, the FFs were underestimated due to larger fat-water phase shifts. Agreement between measured and true FF was excellent for the imaging method at 1.5 T (imaging: FF(meas)=0.98 FF(true)-0.01%, spectroscopy: FF(meas)=0.77 FF(true)+0.08%), and fair at 3 T (imaging: FF(meas)=0.91 FF(true)-0.19%, spectroscopy: FF(meas)=0.79 FF(true)+0.02%). The imaging method was able to quantify FFs down to approx. 0.5%. We conclude that the suggested imaging model is capable of fat quantification with accuracy and precision similar to or better than spectroscopy and offers an improvement vs. a model with a common R(2)* relaxation only.},
  author       = {Månsson, Sven and Peterson, Pernilla and Johansson, Edvin},
  issn         = {1873-5894},
  language     = {eng},
  month        = {07},
  publisher    = {Elsevier},
  series       = {Magnetic Resonance Imaging},
  title        = {Quantification of low fat contents: a comparison of MR imaging and spectroscopy methods at 1.5 and 3 T.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2012.04.023},
  year         = {2012},
}