Comparison and reproducibility of ADC measurements in breathhold, respiratory triggered, and free-breathing diffusion-weighted MR imaging of the liver

J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008 Nov;28(5):1141-8. doi: 10.1002/jmri.21569.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare and determine the reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements of the normal liver parenchyma in breathhold, respiratory triggered, and free-breathing diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI).

Materials and methods: Eleven healthy volunteers underwent three series of DWI. Each DWI series consisted of one breathhold, one respiratory triggered, and two free-breathing (thick and thin slice acquisition) scans of the liver, at b-values of 0 and 500 s/mm2. ADCs of the liver parenchyma were compared by using nonparametric tests. Reproducibility was assessed by the Bland-Altman method.

Results: Mean ADCs (in 10(-3) mm2/sec) in respiratory triggered DWI (2.07-2.27) were significantly higher than mean ADCs in breathhold DWI (1.57-1.62), thick slice free-breathing DWI (1.62-1.65), and thin slice free-breathing DWI (1.57-1.66) (P<0.005). Ranges of mean difference in ADC measurement+/-limits of agreement between two scans were -0.02-0.05+/-0.16-0.24 in breathhold DWI, -0.14-0.20+/-0.59-0.60 in respiratory triggered DWI, -0.03-0.03+/-0.20-0.29 in thick slice free-breathing DWI, and -0.01-0.09+/-0.21-0.29 in thin slice free-breathing DWI.

Conclusion: ADC measurements of the normal liver parenchyma in respiratory triggered DWI are significantly higher and less reproducible than in breathhold and free-breathing DWI.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Evaluation Study

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Algorithms*
  • Artifacts*
  • Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging / methods*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Image Enhancement / methods
  • Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted / methods*
  • Liver / anatomy & histology*
  • Male
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Respiratory Mechanics*
  • Respiratory-Gated Imaging Techniques / methods*
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Young Adult