Prediction of MRI R2*$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$ relaxometry in the presence of hepatic steatosis by Monte Carlo simulations

To develop Monte Carlo simulations to predict the relationship of <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> with liver fat content at 1.5 T and 3.0 T. For various fat fractions (FFs) from 1% to 25%, four types of virtual liver models were developed by incorporating the size and spatial distribution of fat droplets. Magnetic fields were then generated under different fat susceptibilities at 1.5 T and 3.0 T, and proton movement was simulated for phase accrual and MRI signal synthesis. The synthesized signal was fit to single-peak and multi-peak fat signal models for <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> and proton density fat fraction (PDFF) predictions. In addition, the relationships between <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> and PDFF predictions were compared with in vivo calibrations and Bland-Altman analysis was performed to quantitatively evaluate the effects of these components (type of virtual liver model, fat susceptibility, and fat signal model) on <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> predictions. A virtual liver model with realistic morphology of fat droplets was demonstrated, and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> and PDFF values were predicted by Monte Carlo simulations at 1.5 T and 3.0 T. <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> predictions were linearly correlated with PDFF, while the slope was unaffected by the type of virtual liver model and increased as fat susceptibility increased. Compared with in vivo calibrations, the multi-peak fat signal model showed superior performance to the single-peak fat signal model, which yielded an underestimation of liver fat. The <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> -PDFF relationships by simulations with fat susceptibility of 0.6 ppm and the multi-peak fat signal model were <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.490</mml:mn> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:mtext>PDFF</mml:mtext> <mml:mo>+</mml:mo> <mml:mn>28.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast }=0.490\times \mathrm{PDFF}+28.0 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.967</mml:mn></mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {R}^2=0.967 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> , <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi> <mml:mo><</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ p<0.01 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> ) at 1.5 T and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.928</mml:mn> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:mtext>PDFF</mml:mtext> <mml:mo>+</mml:mo> <mml:mn>39.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast }=0.928\times \mathrm{PDFF}+39.4 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.972</mml:mn></mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {R}^2=0.972 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> , <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi> <mml:mo><</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ p<0.01 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> ) at 3.0 T. Monte Carlo simulations provide a new means for <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> -PDFF prediction, which is primarily determined by fat susceptibility, fat signal model, and magnetic field strength. Accurate <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> -PDFF calibration has the potential to correct the effect of fat on <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> quantification, and may be helpful for accurate <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> measurements in liver iron overload.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
NMR in Biomedicine
Published
2024-10-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.5274
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.16

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Prediction of MRI R2*$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$ relaxometry in the presence of hepatic steatosis by Monte Carlo simulations

Junying Cheng, Xiaoben Li, Changqing Wang, Diego Hernando et al.
3 citations
NMR in Biomedicine
Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
1.16
article

Prediction of MRI R2*$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$ relaxometry in the presence of hepatic steatosis by Monte Carlo simulations

Junying Cheng, Xiaoben Li, Changqing Wang, Diego Hernando, Scott B. Reeder, Mengyuan Ma, Zhuangzhuang Fan
article en
3 citations

Abstract

To develop Monte Carlo simulations to predict the relationship of <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> with liver fat content at 1.5 T and 3.0 T. For various fat fractions (FFs) from 1% to 25%, four types of virtual liver models were developed by incorporating the size and spatial distribution of fat droplets. Magnetic fields were then generated under different fat susceptibilities at 1.5 T and 3.0 T, and proton movement was simulated for phase accrual and MRI signal synthesis. The synthesized signal was fit to single-peak and multi-peak fat signal models for <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> and proton density fat fraction (PDFF) predictions. In addition, the relationships between <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> and PDFF predictions were compared with in vivo calibrations and Bland-Altman analysis was performed to quantitatively evaluate the effects of these components (type of virtual liver model, fat susceptibility, and fat signal model) on <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> predictions. A virtual liver model with realistic morphology of fat droplets was demonstrated, and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> and PDFF values were predicted by Monte Carlo simulations at 1.5 T and 3.0 T. <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> predictions were linearly correlated with PDFF, while the slope was unaffected by the type of virtual liver model and increased as fat susceptibility increased. Compared with in vivo calibrations, the multi-peak fat signal model showed superior performance to the single-peak fat signal model, which yielded an underestimation of liver fat. The <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> -PDFF relationships by simulations with fat susceptibility of 0.6 ppm and the multi-peak fat signal model were <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.490</mml:mn> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:mtext>PDFF</mml:mtext> <mml:mo>+</mml:mo> <mml:mn>28.0</mml:mn></mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast }=0.490\times \mathrm{PDFF}+28.0 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.967</mml:mn></mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {R}^2=0.967 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> , <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi> <mml:mo><</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ p<0.01 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> ) at 1.5 T and <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.928</mml:mn> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:mtext>PDFF</mml:mtext> <mml:mo>+</mml:mo> <mml:mn>39.4</mml:mn></mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast }=0.928\times \mathrm{PDFF}+39.4 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.972</mml:mn></mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {R}^2=0.972 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> , <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi> <mml:mo><</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ p<0.01 $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> ) at 3.0 T. Monte Carlo simulations provide a new means for <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> -PDFF prediction, which is primarily determined by fat susceptibility, fat signal model, and magnetic field strength. Accurate <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> -PDFF calibration has the potential to correct the effect of fat on <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> quantification, and may be helpful for accurate <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>*</mml:mo></mml:msubsup> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation>$$ {\mathrm{R}}_2^{\ast } $$</mml:annotation></mml:semantics> </mml:math> measurements in liver iron overload.

NMR in BiomedicineVol. 38(1)
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US), Anhui Medical University (CN), First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University (CN), First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China, Natural Science Foundation of Anhui Province
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
1.16
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.