CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Journal of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology 2022; 05(01): 023-029
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1731964
Original Article

Role of Advanced MRI Techniques in the Quantitative Assessment of Liver Fat—A Multimodality-Based Comparative Study of Diagnostic Performance in a Tertiary Care Institute

Santosh B. Patil
1   Department of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Kovai Medical Center and Hospital, Coimbatore, India
,
Seetharaman Cannane
2   Department of Radiodiagnosis, Kovai Medical Center and Hospital, Coimbatore, India
,
Santhosh Poyyamoli
1   Department of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Kovai Medical Center and Hospital, Coimbatore, India
,
Rinoy R. Anand
1   Department of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Kovai Medical Center and Hospital, Coimbatore, India
,
Venkatesh Kasi
3   Department of Radiology, Kovai Medical Center and Hospital, Coimbatore, India
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the accuracy of noninvasive imaging methods including gray-scale ultrasound, ultrasound shear wave elastography, unenhanced computed tomography (CT), and proton density fat fraction (PDFF) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using three-dimensional (3D) multiecho multipoint chemical shift–encoded spoiled gradient echo (q-DIXON) sequence in the quantification of hepatic steatosis, with proton MR spectroscopy (H1-MRS) as the reference standard in Indian population.

Methods Our study included 100 consecutive adult patients referred to the department of radiology in our hospital for imaging of liver. Fat content of liver was recorded using MRI (H1-MRS and q-DIXON), unenhanced CT (average liver attenuation [ALI] and liver attenuation index [LAI]) and ultrasonography (USG) (gray-scale grading and shear wave elastography [SWE]). Data were analyzed by linear regression and Bland–Altman analysis for each technique compared with H1-MRS. The diagnostic performances of all the methods were compared using DeLong test, for detection of mild and moderate-to-severe hepatic steatosis, separately.

Results MRI q-DIXON PDFF showed excellent correlation (r = 0.917, r2 = 0.840) and strong agreement (1.48 ±3.01) with H1-MRS-derived PDFF measurements. Unenhanced CT-based methods showed moderate correlation with modest agreement (r = −0.826, r2 = 0.681, −40.18 ± 16.05 for ALI and r = −0.858, r2 = 0.735, 13.4 ± 15.3 for LAI) whereas USG gray-scale assessment showed low correlation (weighted Kappa value 0.366) with H1-MRS PDFF. No correlation was found between USG-SWE results and PDFF measured with H1-MRS. Comparison of areas under curve (AUCs) using DeLong test revealed that MRI q-DIXON method performed the best for diagnosis of hepatic steatosis compared with rest. For moderate to severe steatosis, MRI q-DIXON and unenhanced CT-based methods had comparable diagnostic performance with AUCs not showing statistically significant differences.

Conclusion MRI q-DIXON shows strongest correlation with MRS and should be preferred for estimation of hepatic fat, especially when MRS is not available. Unenhanced CT shows limited diagnostic performance in detecting mild steatosis; however, it certainly has a role in diagnosing moderate-to-severe hepatic steatosis, such as evaluating donor candidates for living donor liver transplantation. USG, using both the traditional four-grade visual assessment and elastography in the present form, appears to have limited role in liver fat quantification.



Publication History

Article published online:
01 December 2021

© 2021. Indian Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 
  • References

  • 1 Amarapurkar D, Kamani P, Patel N. et al. Prevalence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: population based study. Ann Hepatol 2007; 6 (03) 161-163
  • 2 Mohan V, Farooq S, Deepa M, Ravikumar R, Pitchumoni CS. Prevalence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in urban south Indians in relation to different grades of glucose intolerance and metabolic syndrome. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2009; 84 (01) 84-91
  • 3 Blachier M, Leleu H, Peck-Radosavljevic M, Valla D-C, Roudot-Thoraval F. The burden of liver disease in Europe: a review of available epidemiological data. J Hepatol 2013; 58 (03) 593-608
  • 4 Ratziu V, Bellentani S, Cortez-Pinto H, Day C, Marchesini G. A position statement on NAFLD/NASH based on the EASL 2009 special conference. J Hepatol 2010; 53 (02) 372-384
  • 5 Veteläinen R, van Vliet A, Gouma DJ, van Gulik TM. Steatosis as a risk factor in liver surgery. Ann Surg 2007; 245 (01) 20-30
  • 6 Hamer OW, Aguirre DA, Casola G, Lavine JE, Woenckhaus M, Sirlin CB. Fatty liver: imaging patterns and pitfalls. Radiographics 2006; 26 (06) 1637-1653
  • 7 Cobbold JFL, Patel JH, Goldin RD. et al. Hepatic lipid profiling in chronic hepatitis C: an in vitro and in vivo proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy study. J Hepatol 2010; 52 (01) 16-24
  • 8 Iwasaki M, Takada Y, Hayashi M. et al. Noninvasive evaluation of graft steatosis in living donor liver transplantation. Transplantation 2004; 78 (10) 1501-1505
  • 9 Ratziu V, Charlotte F, Heurtier A. et al. LIDO Study Group. Sampling variability of liver biopsy in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Gastroenterology 2005; 128 (07) 1898-1906
  • 10 Schwimmer JB, Dunn W, Norman GJ. et al. SAFETY study: alanine aminotransferase cutoff values are set too high for reliable detection of pediatric chronic liver disease. Gastroenterology 2010; 138 (04) 1357-1364 1364.e1–1364.e2
  • 11 Szczepaniak LS, Nurenberg P, Leonard D. et al. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy to measure hepatic triglyceride content: prevalence of hepatic steatosis in the general population. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 2005; 288 (02) E462-E468
  • 12 Lee SS, Park SH, Kim HJ. et al. Non-invasive assessment of hepatic steatosis: prospective comparison of the accuracy of imaging examinations. J Hepatol 2010; 52 (04) 579-585
  • 13 Kramer H, Pickhardt PJ, Kliewer MA. et al. Accuracy of liver fat quantification with advanced CT, MRI, and ultrasound techniques: prospective comparison with MR spectroscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2017; 208 (01) 92-100
  • 14 Needleman L, Kurtz AB, Rifkin MD, Cooper HS, Pasto ME, Goldberg BB. Sonography of diffuse benign liver disease: accuracy of pattern recognition and grading. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1986; 146 (05) 1011-1015
  • 15 Paparo F, Cenderello G, Revelli M, et al. Diagnostic value of MRI proton density fat fraction for assessing liver steatosis in chronic viral C hepatitis. BioMed Res Web site. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4383409/. Published 2015. Accessed February 22, 2020
  • 16 Parente DB, Rodrigues RS, Paiva FF. et al. Is MR spectroscopy really the best MR-based method for the evaluation of fatty liver in diabetic patients in clinical practice?. PLoS One 2014; 9 (11) e112574
  • 17 Satkunasingham J, Nik HH, Fischer S. et al. Can negligible hepatic steatosis determined by magnetic resonance imaging-proton density fat fraction obviate the need for liver biopsy in potential liver donors?. Liver Transpl 2018; 24 (04) 470-477
  • 18 DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988; 44 (03) 837-845
  • 19 Yu H, Reeder SB, Shimakawa A, McKenzie CA, Brittain JH. Robust multipoint water-fat separation using fat likelihood analysis. Magn Reson Med 2012; 67 (04) 1065-1076
  • 20 Delfaut EM, Beltran J, Johnson G, Rousseau J, Marchandise X, Cotten A. Fat suppression in MR imaging: techniques and pitfalls. Radiographics 1999; 19 (02) 373-382
  • 21 Reeder SB, Cruite I, Hamilton G, Sirlin CB. Quantitative assessment of liver fat with magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011; 34 (04) 729-749
  • 22 Satkunasingham J, Besa C, Bane O. et al. Liver fat quantification: comparison of dual-echo and triple-echo chemical shift MRI to MR spectroscopy. Eur J Radiol 2015; 84 (08) 1452-1458
  • 23 Chiang H-J, Lin L-H, Li C-W. et al. Magnetic resonance fat quantification in living donor liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 2014; 46 (03) 666-668
  • 24 Zhao Y-Z, Gan Y-G, Zhou J-L. et al. Accuracy of multi-echo Dixon sequence in quantification of hepatic steatosis in Chinese children and adolescents. World J Gastroenterol 2019; 25 (12) 1513-1523
  • 25 Debongnie JC, Pauls C, Fievez M, Wibin E. Prospective evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of liver ultrasonography. Gut 1981; 22 (02) 130-135
  • 26 Hepburn MJ, Vos JA, Fillman EP, Lawitz EJ. The accuracy of the report of hepatic steatosis on ultrasonography in patients infected with hepatitis C in a clinical setting: a retrospective observational study. BMC Gastroenterol 2005; 5: 14
  • 27 Jeon UB, Chung JW, Jae HJ. et al. May-Thurner syndrome complicated by acute iliofemoral vein thrombosis: helical CT venography for evaluation of long-term stent patency and changes in the iliac vein. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 195 (03) 751-757