• Magn Reson Med · Feb 2012

    Comparative Study

    On the performance of T2* correction methods for quantification of hepatic fat content.

    • Scott B Reeder, Emily K Bice, Huanzhou Yu, Diego Hernando, and Angel R Pineda.
    • Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53792-3252, USA. sreeder@wisc.edu
    • Magn Reson Med. 2012 Feb 1; 67 (2): 389-404.

    AbstractNonalcoholic fatty liver disease is the most prevalent chronic liver disease in Western societies. MRI can quantify liver fat, the hallmark feature of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, so long as multiple confounding factors including T(2)* decay are addressed. Recently developed MRI methods that correct for T(2)* to improve the accuracy of fat quantification either assume a common T(2)* (single-T(2)*) for better stability and noise performance or independently estimate the T(2)* for water and fat (dual-T(2)*) for reduced bias, but with noise performance penalty. In this study, the tradeoff between bias and variance for different T(2)* correction methods is analyzed using the Cramér-Rao bound analysis for biased estimators and is validated using Monte Carlo experiments. A noise performance metric for estimation of fat fraction is proposed. Cramér-Rao bound analysis for biased estimators was used to compute the metric at different echo combinations. Optimization was performed for six echoes and typical T(2)* values. This analysis showed that all methods have better noise performance with very short first echo times and echo spacing of ∼π/2 for single-T(2)* correction, and ∼2π/3 for dual-T(2)* correction. Interestingly, when an echo spacing and first echo shift of ∼π/2 are used, methods without T(2)* correction have less than 5% bias in the estimates of fat fraction.Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.