We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Apparent diffusion coefficient is highly reproducible on preclinical imaging systems: Evidence from a seven-center multivendor study.
- Authors
Doblas, Sabrina; Almeida, Gilberto S.; Blé, François‐Xavier; Garteiser, Philippe; Hoff, Benjamin A.; McIntyre, Dominick J.O.; Wachsmuth, Lydia; Chenevert, Thomas L.; Faber, Cornelius; Griffiths, John R.; Jacobs, Andreas H.; Morris, David M.; O'Connor, James P.B.; Robinson, Simon P.; Van Beers, Bernard E.; Waterton, John C.; Blé, François-Xavier
- Abstract
<bold>Purpose: </bold>To evaluate between-site agreement of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements in preclinical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) systems.<bold>Materials and Methods: </bold>A miniaturized thermally stable ice-water phantom was devised. ADC (mean and interquartile range) was measured over several days, on 4.7T, 7T, and 9.4T Bruker, Agilent, and Magnex small-animal MRI systems using a common protocol across seven sites. Day-to-day repeatability was expressed as percent variation of mean ADC between acquisitions. Cross-site reproducibility was expressed as 1.96 × standard deviation of percent deviation of ADC values.<bold>Results: </bold>ADC measurements were equivalent across all seven sites with a cross-site ADC reproducibility of 6.3%. Mean day-to-day repeatability of ADC measurements was 2.3%, and no site was identified as presenting different measurements than others (analysis of variance [ANOVA] P = 0.02, post-hoc test n.s.). Between-slice ADC variability was negligible and similar between sites (P = 0.15). Mean within-region-of-interest ADC variability was 5.5%, with one site presenting a significantly greater variation than the others (P = 0.0013).<bold>Conclusion: </bold>Absolute ADC values in preclinical studies are comparable between sites and equipment, provided standardized protocols are employed.
- Subjects
EUROPE; UNITED States; MAGNETIC resonance imaging equipment; DIAGNOSTIC imaging equipment; COMPARATIVE studies; MAGNETIC resonance imaging; RESEARCH methodology; MEDICAL cooperation; COMPUTERS in medicine; IMAGING phantoms; RESEARCH; RESEARCH funding; PRODUCT design; EVALUATION research; MEDICAL equipment reliability
- Publication
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2015, Vol 42, Issue 6, p1759
- ISSN
1053-1807
- Publication type
journal article
- DOI
10.1002/jmri.24955