We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Comparison of readout-segmented and conventional single-shot for echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging in the assessment of kidney interstitial fibrosis.
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging : JMRI 2017 December
PURPOSE: To compare readout-segmented echo-planar imaging (EPI) (RESOLVE) to single-shot EPI (ss-EPI) diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for the assessment of renal interstitial fibrosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A phantom, eight healthy volunteers (under 30 years to avoid age-fibrosis related) and 27 chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients (scheduled for kidney biopsy) were scanned (at 3T) with ss-EPI and 5-shot RESOLVE DWI (resolution: 2 × 2 × 5 mm3 , 10 b-values). The cortico-medullary difference for each DW parameter from a monoexponential fit (ΔADC) or, segmented biexponential fit (ΔD, ΔD*, ΔFp ) were compared between both sequences. A fibrosis threshold of 40% was defined to separate all 35 subjects into low and high fibrosis groups. The linear relationship between DW parameters and percentage fibrosis (up to 80%) from Masson trichrome was assessed with the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient. Fisher Z-transform was used for R2 correlation comparison.
RESULTS: A coefficient of variation between ADCs of 3% was measured between both sequences in the phantom. In healthy volunteers, no significant difference was measured for all DW parameters. Both sequences separated low to high level of fibrosis with a significant decrease of ΔADC (RESOLVE P = 3.1 × 10-6 , ss-EPI P = 0.003) and ΔD (RESOLVE P = 8.2 × 10-5 , ss-EPI P = 0.02) in the high level of fibrosis. However, RESOLVE ΔADC had a stronger negative correlation (P = 0.04 for R2 comparison) with fibrosis than ss-EPI ΔADC (RESOLVE R2 = 0.65, P = 5.9 × 10-9 , ss-EPI R2 = 0.29, P = 8.9 × 10-4 ). ΔD (RESOLVE) was correlated (moderately) with fibrosis (R2 = 0.29, P = 9.2 × 10-4 ); however, ΔD* and ΔFp did not show, in our population, a significant correlation with interstitial fibrosis (0.01 < R2 < 0.08).
CONCLUSION: ΔADC derived from both sequences correlated with fibrosis. ΔADC from RESOLVE showed better correlation with fibrosis than ΔADC from ss-EPI and therefore has potential to monitor CKD.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;46:1631-1640.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A phantom, eight healthy volunteers (under 30 years to avoid age-fibrosis related) and 27 chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients (scheduled for kidney biopsy) were scanned (at 3T) with ss-EPI and 5-shot RESOLVE DWI (resolution: 2 × 2 × 5 mm3 , 10 b-values). The cortico-medullary difference for each DW parameter from a monoexponential fit (ΔADC) or, segmented biexponential fit (ΔD, ΔD*, ΔFp ) were compared between both sequences. A fibrosis threshold of 40% was defined to separate all 35 subjects into low and high fibrosis groups. The linear relationship between DW parameters and percentage fibrosis (up to 80%) from Masson trichrome was assessed with the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient. Fisher Z-transform was used for R2 correlation comparison.
RESULTS: A coefficient of variation between ADCs of 3% was measured between both sequences in the phantom. In healthy volunteers, no significant difference was measured for all DW parameters. Both sequences separated low to high level of fibrosis with a significant decrease of ΔADC (RESOLVE P = 3.1 × 10-6 , ss-EPI P = 0.003) and ΔD (RESOLVE P = 8.2 × 10-5 , ss-EPI P = 0.02) in the high level of fibrosis. However, RESOLVE ΔADC had a stronger negative correlation (P = 0.04 for R2 comparison) with fibrosis than ss-EPI ΔADC (RESOLVE R2 = 0.65, P = 5.9 × 10-9 , ss-EPI R2 = 0.29, P = 8.9 × 10-4 ). ΔD (RESOLVE) was correlated (moderately) with fibrosis (R2 = 0.29, P = 9.2 × 10-4 ); however, ΔD* and ΔFp did not show, in our population, a significant correlation with interstitial fibrosis (0.01 < R2 < 0.08).
CONCLUSION: ΔADC derived from both sequences correlated with fibrosis. ΔADC from RESOLVE showed better correlation with fibrosis than ΔADC from ss-EPI and therefore has potential to monitor CKD.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;46:1631-1640.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app