Comparison of Multimaterial Decomposition Fat Fraction with DECT and Proton Density Fat Fraction with IDEAL IQ MRI for Quantification of Liver Steatosis in a Population Exposed to Chemotherapy

• Published in: Dose-response Vol. 19; no. 2; p. 1559325820984938
• Main Authors: Corrias, Giuseppe, Erta, Marco, Sini, Marcello, Sardu, Claudia, Saba, Luca, Mahmood, Usman, Huicochea Castellanos, Sandra, Bates, David, Mondanelli, Nicola, Thomsen, Brian, Carollo, Gabriella, Sawan, Peter, Mannelli, Lorenzo
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.04.2021; SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC; SAGE Publishing
• Subjects: Chemotherapy; Fatty liver; State of the Art CT and Image Quality, Radiation, and Contrast Dose; medical oncology; X-Ray computed; magnetic resonance imaging; fatty liver; tomography
• ISSN: 1559-3258; 1559-3258
• DOI: 10.1177/1559325820984938

Introduction: Oncologic patients who develop chemotherapy-associated liver injury (CALI) secondary to chemotherapy treatment tend to have worse outcomes. Biopsy remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of hepatic steatosis. The purpose of this article is to compare 2 alternatives: Proton-Density-Fat-Fraction (PDFF) MRI and MultiMaterial-Decomposition (MMD) DECT. Materials and Methods: 49 consecutive oncologic patients treated with Chemotherapy underwent abdominal DECT and abdominal MRI within 2 weeks of each other. Two radiologists tracked Regions of Interest independently both in the PDFF fat maps and in the MMD DECT fat maps. Non-parametric exact Wilcoxon signed rank test and Cohen’s K were used to compare the 2 sequences and to evaluate the agreement. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the fat fraction measured as a continuous value between PDFF and DECT between 2 readers. Within the same imaging method (PDFF) the degree of agreement based on the k coefficient between reader 1 and reader 2 is 0.88 (p-value < 0.05). Similarly, for single-source DECT(ssDECT) the degree of agreement based on the k coefficient between reader 1 and reader 2 is 0.97 (p-value < 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrate that the hepatic fat fraction of ssDECT with MMD are not significantly different from PDFF. This could be an advantage in an oncological population that undergoes serial CT scans for follow up of chemotherapy response.