Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 4/2012

Open Access 01-04-2012 | Magnetic Resonance

Effects of microperfusion in hepatic diffusion weighted imaging

Authors: Hildebrand Dijkstra, Paul Baron, Peter Kappert, Matthijs Oudkerk, Paul E. Sijens

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 4/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

Clinical hepatic diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) generally relies on mono-exponential diffusion. The aim was to demonstrate that mono-exponential diffusion in the liver is contaminated by microperfusion and that the bi-exponential model is required.

Methods

Nineteen fasting healthy volunteers were examined with DWI (seven b-values) using fat suppression and respiratory triggering (1.5 T). Five different regions in the liver were analysed regarding the mono-exponentially fitted apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and the bi-exponential model: molecular diffusion (D slow ), microperfusion (D fast ) and the respective fractions (f slow/fast ). Data were compared using ANOVA and Kruskal–Wallis tests. Simulations were performed by repeating our data analyses, using just the DWI series acquired with b-values approximating those of previous studies.

Results

Median mono-exponentially fitted ADCs varied significantly (P < 0.001) between 1.107 and 1.423 × 10−3 mm2/s for the five regions. Bi-exponential fitted Dslow varied between 0.923 and 1.062 × 10−3 mm2/s without significant differences (P = 0.140). D fast varied significantly, between 17.8 and 46.8 × 10−3 mm2/s (P < 0.001). F-tests showed that the diffusion data fitted the bi-exponential model significantly better than the mono-exponential model (F > 21.4, P < 0.010). These results were confirmed by the simulations.

Conclusion

ADCs of normal liver tissue are significantly dependent on the measurement location because of substantial microperfusion contamination; therefore the bi-exponential model should be used.

Key Points

  • Diffusion weighted MR imaging helps clinicians to differentiate tumours by diffusion properties
  • Fast moving water molecules experience microperfusion, slow molecules diffusion
  • Hepatic diffusion should be measured by bi-exponential models to avoid microperfusion contamination
  • Mono-exponential models are contaminated with microperfusion, resulting in apparent regional diffusion differences
  • Bi-exponential models are necessary to measure diffusion and microperfusion in the liver
Literature
1.
Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D, Grenier P, Cabanis E, Laval-Jeantet M (1986) MR imaging of intravoxel incoherent motions: application to diffusion and perfusion in neurologic disorders. Radiology 161:401–407PubMed
2.
Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D, Aubin ML, Vignaud J, Laval-Jeantet M (1988) Separation of diffusion and perfusion in intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging. Radiology 168:497–505PubMed
3.
Le Bihan D, Turner R, Moonen CT, Pekar J (1991) Imaging of diffusion and microcirculation with gradient sensitization: design, strategy, and significance. J Magn Reson Imaging 1:7–28PubMedCrossRef
4.
Müller MF, Prasad P, Siewert B, Nissenbaum MA, Raptopoulos V, Edelman RR (1994) Abdominal diffusion mapping with use of a whole-body echo-planar system. Radiology 190:475–478PubMed
5.
Turner R, Le Bihan D, Maier J, Vavrek R, Hedges LK, Pekar J (1990) Echo-planar imaging of intravoxel incoherent motion. Radiology 177:407–414PubMed
6.
Namimoto T, Yamashita Y, Sumi S, Tang Y, Takahashi M (1997) Focal liver masses: characterization with diffusion-weighted echo-planar MR imaging. Radiology 204:739–744PubMed
7.
Ichikawa T, Haradome H, Hachiya J, Nitatori T, Araki T (1999) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging with single-shot echo-planar imaging in the upper abdomen: preliminary clinical experience in 61 patients. Abdom Imaging 24:456–461PubMedCrossRef
8.
Kim T, Murakami T, Takahashi S, Hori M, Tsuda K, Nakamura H (1999) Diffusion-weighted single-shot echoplanar MR imaging for liver disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 173:393–398PubMed
9.
Yamada I, Aung W, Himeno Y, Nakagawa T, Shibuya H (1999) Diffusion coefficients in abdominal organs and hepatic lesions: evaluation with intravoxel incoherent motion echo-planar MR imaging. Radiology 210:617–623PubMed
10.
Moteki T, Horikoshi H, Oya N, Aoki J, Endo K (2002) Evaluation of hepatic lesions and hepatic parenchyma using diffusion-weighted reordered turboFLASH magnetic resonance images. J Magn Reson Imaging 15:564–572PubMedCrossRef
11.
Moteki T, Horikoshi H (2006) Evaluation of hepatic lesions and hepatic parenchyma using diffusion-weighted echo-planar MR with three values of gradient b-factor. J Magn Reson Imaging 24:637–645PubMedCrossRef
12.
Coenegrachts K, Delanote J, Ter Beek L et al (2009) Evaluation of true diffusion, perfusion factor, and apparent diffusion coefficient in non-necrotic liver metastases and uncomplicated liver hemangiomas using black-blood echo planar imaging. Eur J Radiol 69:131–138PubMedCrossRef
13.
Luciani A, Vignaud A, Cavet M et al (2008) Liver cirrhosis: intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging–pilot study. Radiology 249:891–899PubMedCrossRef
14.
Moteki T, Horikoshi H (2011) Evaluation of noncirrhotic hepatic parenchyma with and without significant portal vein stenosis using diffusion-weighted echo-planar MR on the basis of multiple-perfusion-components theory. Magn Reson Imaging 29:64–73PubMedCrossRef
15.
16.
Taouli B, Vilgrain V, Dumont E, Daire JL, Fan B, Menu Y (2003) Evaluation of liver diffusion isotropy and characterization of focal hepatic lesions with two single-shot echo-planar MR imaging sequences: prospective study in 66 patients. Radiology 226:71–78PubMedCrossRef
17.
Talwalkar JA, Yin M, Fidler JL, Sanderson SO, Kamath PS, Ehman RL (2008) Magnetic resonance imaging of hepatic fibrosis: emerging clinical applications. Hepatology 47:332–342PubMedCrossRef
18.
Chan JH, Tsui EY, Luk SH et al (2001) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of the liver: distinguishing hepatic abscess from cystic or necrotic tumor. Abdom Imaging 26:161–165PubMedCrossRef
19.
Mürtz P, Flacke S, Träber F, van den Brink JS, Gieseke J, Schild HH (2002) Abdomen: diffusion-weighted MR imaging with pulse-triggered single-shot sequences. Radiology 224:258–264PubMedCrossRef
20.
Boulanger Y, Amara M, Lepanto L et al (2003) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of the liver of hepatitis C patients. NMR Biomed 16:132–136PubMedCrossRef
21.
Bruegel M, Holzapfel K, Gaa J et al (2008) Characterization of focal liver lesions by ADC measurements using a respiratory triggered diffusion-weighted single-shot echo-planar MR imaging technique. Eur Radiol 18:477–485PubMedCrossRef
22.
Perman WH, Balci NC, Akduman I, Kuntz E (2009) Magnetic resonance measurement of diffusion in the abdomen. Top Magn Reson Imaging 20:99–104PubMedCrossRef
23.
Sandrasegaran K, Akisik FM, Lin C et al (2009) Value of diffusion-weighted MRI for assessing liver fibrosis and cirrhosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:1556–1560PubMedCrossRef
24.
Dale BM, Braithwaite AC, Boll DT, Merkle EM (2010) Field strength and diffusion encoding technique affect the apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in diffusion-weighted imaging of the abdomen. Invest Radiol 45:104–108PubMedCrossRef
25.
Nasu K, Kuroki Y, Sekiguchi R, Kazama T, Nakajima H (2006) Measurement of the apparent diffusion coefficient in the liver: is it a reliable index for hepatic disease diagnosis? Radiat Med 24:438–444PubMedCrossRef
26.
Kiliçkesmez O, Yirik G, Bayramoğlu S, Cimilli T, Aydin S (2008) Non-breath-hold high b-value diffusion-weighted MRI with parallel imaging technique: apparent diffusion coefficient determination in normal abdominal organs. Diagn Interv Radiol 14:83–87PubMed
27.
28.
Lagarias JC, Reeds JA, Wright MH, Wright PE (1998) Convergence properties of the Nelder-Mead Simplex method in low dimensions. SIAM J Optim 9:112–147CrossRef
29.
Hampel FR (1974) The influence curve and its role in robust estimation. J Am Statist Assoc 69:383–393CrossRef
30.
Yoshikawa T, Kawamitsu H, Mitchell DG et al (2006) ADC measurement of abdominal organs and lesions using parallel imaging technique. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:1521–1530PubMedCrossRef
31.
Guiu B, Cercueil JP (2011) Liver diffusion-weighted MR imaging: the tower of Babel? Eur Radiol 21:463–467PubMedCrossRef
32.
Chow LC, Bammer R, Moseley ME, Sommer FG (2003) Single breath-hold diffusion-weighted imaging of the abdomen. J Magn Reson Imaging 18:377–382PubMedCrossRef
33.
Baron P, Dorrius MD, Kappert P, Oudkerk M, Sijens PE (2010) Diffusion-weighted imaging of normal fibroglandular breast tissue: influence of microperfusion and fat suppression technique on the apparent diffusion coefficient. NMR Biomed 23:399–405PubMed
34.
Padhani AR, Liu G, Koh DM et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: consensus and recommendations. Neoplasia 11:102–125PubMed
35.
Zhang JL, Sigmund EE, Chandarana H et al (2010) Variability of renal apparent diffusion coefficients: limitations of the monoexponential model for diffusion quantification. Radiology 254:783–792PubMedCrossRef
36.
Koh DM, Scurr E, Collins DJ et al (2006) Colorectal hepatic metastases: quantitative measurements using single-shot echo-planar diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Eur Radiol 16:1898–1905PubMedCrossRef
37.
Kandpal H, Sharma R, Madhusudhan KS, Kapoor KS (2009) Respiratory-triggered versus breath-hold diffusion-weighted MRI of liver lesions: comparison of image quality and apparent diffusion coefficient values. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192:915–922PubMedCrossRef
38.
Kwee TC, Takahara T, Niwa T et al (2009) Influence of cardiac motion on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the liver. MAGMA 22:319–325PubMedCrossRef
39.
Nasu K, Kuroki Y, Fujii H, Minami M (2007) Hepatic pseudo-anisotropy: a specific artifact in hepatic diffusion-weighted images obtained with respiratory triggering. MAGMA 20:205–211PubMedCrossRef
40.
Su BY, Jin ZY, Liu W et al (2010) Features of eight segments of liver perfusion with the second generation dual-source computed tomography. Acta Acad Med Sin 32:655–658
41.
Scharf J, Kemmling A, Hess T, Mehrabi A, Kauffmann G, Groden C, Brix G (2007) Assessment of hepatic perfusion in transplanted livers by pharmacokinetic analysis of dynamic magnetic resonance measurements. Invest Radiol 42:224–229PubMedCrossRef
42.
Tutcu S, Serter S, Kaya Y, Kara E, Neşe N, Pekindil G, Coşkun T (2010) Hepatic perfusion changes in an experimental model of acute pancreatitis: evaluation by perfusion CT. Eur J Radiol 75:203–206PubMedCrossRef
43.
Schmucker DL (2005) Age-related changes in liver structure and function: implications for disease? Exp Gerontol 40:650–659PubMedCrossRef
44.
45.
Pasquinelli F, Belli G, Mazzoni LN, Grazioli L, Colagrande S (2011) Magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging: quantitative evaluation of age-related changes in healthy liver parenchyma. Magn Reson Imaging 29:805–812PubMedCrossRef
46.
Gourtsoyianni S, Papanikolaou N, Yarmenitis S, Maris T, Karantanas A, Gourtsoyiannis N (2008) Respiratory gated diffusion-weighted imaging of the liver: value of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements in the differentiation between most commonly encountered benign and malignant focal liver lesions. Eur Radiol 18:486–492PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Effects of microperfusion in hepatic diffusion weighted imaging
Authors
Hildebrand Dijkstra
Paul Baron
Peter Kappert
Matthijs Oudkerk
Paul E. Sijens
Publication date
01-04-2012
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 4/2012
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2313-1

Other articles of this Issue 4/2012

European Radiology 4/2012 Go to the issue

Gastrointestinal

Dynamic contrast enhanced-MRI for the detection of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer

Computed Tomography

Quantitative assessment of tumour associated neovascularisation in patients with liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma: role of dynamic-CT perfusion imaging

Hepatobiliary-Pancreas

Accuracy of gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome in patients with chemotherapy-treated colorectal liver metastases

Oncology

Are contrast media required for (68)Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT in patients with neuroendocrine tumours of the abdomen?

Magnetic Resonance

Effectiveness of semi-quantitative multiphase dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI as a predictor of malignancy in complex adnexal masses: radiological and pathological correlation

Physics

Excess radiation and organ dose in chest and abdominal CT due to CT acquisition beyond expected anatomical boundaries