Body composition assessment: comparison of quantitative values between magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography

被引:18
|
作者
Zaffina, Chiara [1 ]
Wyttenbach, Rolf [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Pagnamenta, Alberto [5 ,6 ,7 ]
Grasso, Rosario Francesco [8 ]
Biroli, Matteo [9 ]
Del Grande, Filippo [2 ,3 ]
Rizzo, Stefania [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Policlin Univ Campus Biomed Roma, Rome, Italy
[2] Ente Osped Cantonale, Ist Imaging Svizzera Italiana IIMSI, Lugano, Switzerland
[3] Univ Svizzera Italiana, Fac Sci Biomed, Lugano, Switzerland
[4] Univ Bern, Bern Univ Hosp, Inselspital, Dept Diagnost Intervent & Pediat Radiol DIPR, Bern, Switzerland
[5] Ente Osped Cantonale, Clin Trial Unit, Lugano, Switzerland
[6] Ente Osped Cantonale, Intens Care Unit, Mendrisio, Switzerland
[7] Univ Geneva, Div Pneumol, Geneva, Switzerland
[8] Univ Campus Biomed Roma, Unit Intervent Radiol, Dept Fac Med & Surg, Rome, Italy
[9] Humanitas Univ, Dept Biomed Sci, Milan, Italy
关键词
Body composition; computed tomography (CT); magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); SUBCUTANEOUS ADIPOSE-TISSUE; SKELETAL-MUSCLE; RISK-FACTORS; CANCER-PATIENTS; INSULIN ACTION; SARCOPENIA; CT; OBESITY; FAT; QUANTIFICATION;
D O I
10.21037/qims-21-619
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Background: The primary objective of this study was to compare measurements of skeletal muscle index (SMI), visceral adipose tissue (VAT) and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) at the level of L3, on subjects who underwent computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations within a three-month period. The secondary objective was to compare the automatic and semi-automatic quantifications of the same values for CT images. Methods: Among subjects who underwent CT and MRI at our Institution between 2011 and 2020, exclusion criteria were: presence of extensive artifacts; images not including the whole waist circumference; CT acquired with low-dose technique and lack of non-contrast images. A set of three axial images (CT, MRI T1-weighted and T2-weighted) were used to extract the following measurements with semi-automatic segmentations: SMI [calculated normalizing skeletal muscle area (SMA) by the square height], SAT, VAT. For the CT images only, the same values were also calculated by using automatic segmentation. Statistical analysis was performed comparing quantitative MRI and CT measurements by Pearson correlation analysis and by Bland-Altman agreement analysis. Results: A total of 123 patients were included. By performing linear regression analysis, CT and MRI measurements of SMI showed a high correlation (r(2) =0.81 for T1, r(2) =0.89 for T2), with a mean logarithmic difference between CT and MRI quantitative values of 0.041 for T1-weighted and 0.072 for T2-weighted images. CT and MRI measurements of SAT showed high correlation (r(2) =0.81 for T1; r(2) =0.81 for T2), with a mean logarithmic difference between CT and MRI values of 0.0174 for T1-weighted and 0.201 for T2-weighted images. CT and MRI measurements of VAT showed high correlation (r(2) =0.94 for T1; r(2) =0.93 for T2), with a mean logarithmic difference of 0.040 for T1-weighted and -0.084 for T2-weighted images. The comparison of values extracted by semi-automatic and automatic segmentations were highly correlated. Conclusions: Quantification of body composition values at MRI from T1-weighted and T2-weighted images was highly correlated to same values at CT, therefore quantitative values of body composition among patients who underwent either one of the examinations may be compared. CT body composition values extracted by semi-automatic and automatic segmentations showed high correlation.
引用
收藏
页码:1450 / +
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Assessment of coronary blood flow with computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging
    Karl H. Schuleri
    Richard T. George
    Albert C. Lardo
    Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, 2010, 17 : 582 - 590
  • [22] Ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance, imaging in the assessment of pelvic pathology
    Balan, P
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2006, 58 (01) : 147 - 155
  • [23] COMPARISON OF MAGNETIC-RESONANCE IMAGING WITH COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY OF THE ORBIT
    GROSSNIKLAUS, HE
    LEVINE, M
    PURNELL, EW
    ORBIT-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON ORBITAL DISORDERS AND FACIAL RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 1985, 4 (04): : 221 - 230
  • [24] Computed tomography and magnetic resonance fusion imaging in cholesteatoma preoperative assessment
    Campos, Agustin
    Mata, Federico
    Reboll, Rosa
    Luisa Peris, Maria
    Basterra, Jorge
    EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF OTO-RHINO-LARYNGOLOGY, 2017, 274 (03) : 1405 - 1411
  • [25] Assessment of coronary blood flow with computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging
    Schuleri, Karl H.
    George, Richard T.
    Lardo, Albert C.
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR CARDIOLOGY, 2010, 17 (04) : 582 - 590
  • [26] Comparison of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in evaluation of skull lesions
    Vijinder Arora
    Bikramjit Singh Sidhu
    Kunwarpal Singh
    Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, 53
  • [27] Comparison of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of parotid tumors
    Koyuncu, M
    Sesen, T
    Akan, H
    Ismailoglu, AA
    Tanyeri, Y
    Tekat, A
    Ünal, R
    Incesu, L
    OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY, 2003, 129 (06) : 726 - 732
  • [28] MAGNETIC-RESONANCE-IMAGING OF OSTEOSARCOMAS - COMPARISON WITH COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY
    ZIMMER, WD
    BERQUIST, TH
    MCLEOD, RA
    SIM, FH
    PRITCHARD, DJ
    SHIVES, TC
    WOLD, LE
    MAY, GR
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 1986, (208) : 289 - 299
  • [29] Eosinophilic hepatic necrosis - Magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography comparison
    Yu, JS
    Yoon, SW
    Park, MS
    Lee, JH
    Kim, KW
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY, 2005, 29 (06) : 765 - 771
  • [30] Quantitative Analysis of a Whole Cardiac Mass Using Dual-Energy Computed Tomography: Comparison with Conventional Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging
    Yoo Jin Hong
    Jin Hur
    Kyunghwa Han
    Dong Jin Im
    Young Joo Suh
    Hye-Jeong Lee
    Young Jin Kim
    Byoung Wook Choi
    Scientific Reports, 8