Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Quantification of muscle fat in patients with low back pain: Comparison of multi-echo MR imaging with single-voxel MR spectroscopy


Fischer, Michael A; Nanz, Daniel; Shimakawa, Ann; Schirmer, Timo; Guggenberger, Roman; Chhabra, Avneesh; Carrino, John A; Andreisek, Gustav (2013). Quantification of muscle fat in patients with low back pain: Comparison of multi-echo MR imaging with single-voxel MR spectroscopy. Radiology, 266(2):555-563.

Abstract

Purpose:To compare lumbar muscle fat-signal fractions derived from three-dimensional dual gradient-echo magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and multiple gradient-echo MR imaging with fractions from single-voxel MR spectroscopy in patients with low back pain.Materials and Methods:This prospective study had institutional review board approval, and written informed consent was obtained from all study participants. Fifty-six patients (32 women; mean age, 52 years ± 15 [standard deviation]; age range, 20-79 years) with low back pain underwent standard 1.5-T MR imaging, which was supplemented by dual-echo MR imaging, multi-echo MR imaging, and MR spectroscopy to quantify fatty degeneration of bilateral lumbar multifidus muscles in a region of interest at the intervertebral level of L4 through L5. Fat-signal fractions were determined from signal intensities on fat- and water-only images from both imaging data sets (dual-echo and multi-echo fat-signal fractions without T2* correction) or directly obtained, with additional T2* correction, from multi-echo MR imaging. The results were compared with MR spectroscopic fractions. The Student t test and Bland-Altman plots were used to quantify agreement between fat-signal fractions derived from imaging and from spectroscopy.Results:In total, 102 spectroscopic measurements were obtained bilaterally (46 of 56) or unilaterally (10 of 56). Mean spectroscopic fat-signal fraction was 19.6 ± 11.4 (range, 5.4-63.5). Correlation between spectroscopic and all imaging-based fat-signal fractions was statistically significant (R(2) = 0.87-0.92; all P < .001). Mean dual-echo fat-signal fractions not corrected for T2* and multi-echo fat-signal fractions corrected for T2* significantly differed from spectroscopic fractions (both P < .01), but mean multi-echo fractions not corrected for T2* did not (P = .11). There was a small measurement bias of 0.5% (95% limits of agreement: -6.0%, 7.2%) compared with spectroscopic fractions.Conclusion:Large-volume image-based (dual-echo and multi-echo MR imaging) and spectroscopic fat-signal fractions agree well, thus allowing fast and accurate quantification of muscle fat content in patients with low back pain.© RSNA, 2012.

Abstract

Purpose:To compare lumbar muscle fat-signal fractions derived from three-dimensional dual gradient-echo magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and multiple gradient-echo MR imaging with fractions from single-voxel MR spectroscopy in patients with low back pain.Materials and Methods:This prospective study had institutional review board approval, and written informed consent was obtained from all study participants. Fifty-six patients (32 women; mean age, 52 years ± 15 [standard deviation]; age range, 20-79 years) with low back pain underwent standard 1.5-T MR imaging, which was supplemented by dual-echo MR imaging, multi-echo MR imaging, and MR spectroscopy to quantify fatty degeneration of bilateral lumbar multifidus muscles in a region of interest at the intervertebral level of L4 through L5. Fat-signal fractions were determined from signal intensities on fat- and water-only images from both imaging data sets (dual-echo and multi-echo fat-signal fractions without T2* correction) or directly obtained, with additional T2* correction, from multi-echo MR imaging. The results were compared with MR spectroscopic fractions. The Student t test and Bland-Altman plots were used to quantify agreement between fat-signal fractions derived from imaging and from spectroscopy.Results:In total, 102 spectroscopic measurements were obtained bilaterally (46 of 56) or unilaterally (10 of 56). Mean spectroscopic fat-signal fraction was 19.6 ± 11.4 (range, 5.4-63.5). Correlation between spectroscopic and all imaging-based fat-signal fractions was statistically significant (R(2) = 0.87-0.92; all P < .001). Mean dual-echo fat-signal fractions not corrected for T2* and multi-echo fat-signal fractions corrected for T2* significantly differed from spectroscopic fractions (both P < .01), but mean multi-echo fractions not corrected for T2* did not (P = .11). There was a small measurement bias of 0.5% (95% limits of agreement: -6.0%, 7.2%) compared with spectroscopic fractions.Conclusion:Large-volume image-based (dual-echo and multi-echo MR imaging) and spectroscopic fat-signal fractions agree well, thus allowing fast and accurate quantification of muscle fat content in patients with low back pain.© RSNA, 2012.

Statistics

Citations

35 citations in Web of Science®
42 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2013
Deposited On:30 Nov 2012 11:25
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 16:06
Publisher:Radiological Society of North America
Series Name:Radiology
ISSN:0033-8419
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12120399
PubMed ID:23143025

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations