Özyurt Gökhan Mert, Esen Kaan, Üçbilek Enver, Apaydın Feramuz Demir
Mersin University, School of Medicine, Department of Radiology - Mersin, Turkey.
Mersin University, School of Medicine, Department of Gastroenterology - Mersin, Turkey.
Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2024 Dec 2;70(12):e20241008. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.20241008. eCollection 2024.
This study aims to compare liver and spleen stiffness measurements using magnetic resonance elastography with T1 and T2 relaxation times in patients with chronic liver disease.
A total of 75 chronic liver disease patients and 25 healthy volunteers underwent MR. Patients with significant liver fat and iron accumulation were excluded. Student's t-test was employed to compare magnetic resonance elastography and T1/T2 values. Pearson's correlation test was used to assess the relationship between magnetic resonance elastography and T1/T2 values.
Liver magnetic resonance elastography showed a significant moderate positive correlation with liver T1 mapping (r=0.51, p<0.001) and liver T2 mapping (r=0.30, p=0.009) in patients. Spleen magnetic resonance elastography exhibited a significant moderate positive correlation with spleen T2 mapping (r=0.37, p=0.001). However, there was no significant correlation between spleen magnetic resonance elastography and spleen T1 mapping in patients. Spleen magnetic resonance elastography was moderately positively correlated with liver magnetic resonance elastography (r=0.30, p=0.01), and spleen volume showed positive correlations with spleen magnetic resonance elastography, spleen T1 mapping, and spleen T2 mapping. Cut-off values for liver magnetic resonance elastography, liver T1 mapping, and liver T2 mapping in patient and control groups were 2.6 kPa (AUC=0.97), 619 ms (AUC=0.90), and 52.5 ms (AUC=0.62), respectively.
Relaxation methods offer noninvasive imaging without additional equipment. Liver T1 mapping may serve as an alternative to magnetic resonance elastography for chronic liver patient follow-up, while spleen T1 mapping is not reliable.
本研究旨在比较慢性肝病患者使用磁共振弹性成像测量的肝脏和脾脏硬度与T1和T2弛豫时间。
共有75例慢性肝病患者和25名健康志愿者接受了磁共振检查。排除了肝脏脂肪和铁大量蓄积的患者。采用学生t检验比较磁共振弹性成像和T1/T2值。使用Pearson相关检验评估磁共振弹性成像与T1/T2值之间的关系。
在患者中，肝脏磁共振弹性成像与肝脏T1成像（r = 0.51，p < 0.001）和肝脏T2成像（r = 0.30，p = 0.009）呈显著中度正相关。脾脏磁共振弹性成像与脾脏T2成像呈显著中度正相关（r = 0.37，p = 0.001）。然而，患者的脾脏磁共振弹性成像与脾脏T1成像之间无显著相关性。脾脏磁共振弹性成像与肝脏磁共振弹性成像呈中度正相关（r = 0.30，p = 0.01），脾脏体积与脾脏磁共振弹性成像、脾脏T1成像和脾脏T2成像呈正相关。患者组和对照组肝脏磁共振弹性成像、肝脏T1成像和肝脏T2成像的截断值分别为2.6 kPa（AUC = 0.97）、619 ms（AUC = 0.90）和52.5 ms（AUC = 0.62）。
弛豫方法无需额外设备即可提供无创成像。肝脏T1成像可作为慢性肝病患者随访中磁共振弹性成像的替代方法，而脾脏T1成像不可靠。
