Contrast-enhanced 3T MR Perfusion of Musculoskeletal Tumours: T1 Value Heterogeneity Assessment and Evaluation of the Influence of T1 Estimation Methods on Quantitative Parameters.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate intra-tumour and striated muscle T1 value heterogeneity and the influence of different methods of T1 estimation on the variability of quantitative perfusion parameters.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eighty-two patients with a histologically confirmed musculoskeletal tumour were prospectively included in this study and, with ethics committee approval, underwent contrast-enhanced MR perfusion and T1 mapping. T1 value variations in viable tumour areas and in normal-appearing striated muscle were assessed. In 20 cases, normal muscle perfusion parameters were calculated using three different methods: signal based and gadolinium concentration based on fixed and variable T1 values.

RESULTS

Tumour and normal muscle T1 values were significantly different (p = 0.0008). T1 value heterogeneity was higher in tumours than in normal muscle (variation of 19.8% versus 13%). The T1 estimation method had a considerable influence on the variability of perfusion parameters. Fixed T1 values yielded higher coefficients of variation than variable T1 values (mean 109.6 ± 41.8% and 58.3 ± 14.1% respectively). Area under the curve was the least variable parameter (36%).

CONCLUSION

T1 values in musculoskeletal tumours are significantly different and more heterogeneous than normal muscle. Patient-specific T1 estimation is needed for direct inter-patient comparison of perfusion parameters.

KEY POINTS

• T1 value variation in musculoskeletal tumours is considerable. • T1 values in muscle and tumours are significantly different. • Patient-specific T1 estimation is needed for comparison of inter-patient perfusion parameters. • Technical variation is higher in permeability than semiquantitative perfusion parameters.