Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32318847›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2020

Prospective comparison of longitudinal change in hepatic proton density fat fraction (PDFF) estimated by magnitude-based MRI (MRI-M) and complex-based MRI (MRI-C).

Adrija Mamidipalli, Kathryn J Fowler, Gavin Hamilton, Tanya Wolfson, Yesenia Covarrubias, Calvin Tran, Soudabeh Fazeli, Curtis N Wiens, Alan McMillan, Nathan S Artz and 8 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Adrija MamidipalliLiver Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, University of California - San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Kathryn J FowlerLiver Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, University of California - San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Gavin HamiltonLiver Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, University of California - San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Tanya WolfsonComputational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, Supercomputer Center, University of California - San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Yesenia CovarrubiasLiver Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, University of California - San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Calvin TranLiver Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, University of California - San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Soudabeh FazeliLiver Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, University of California - San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Curtis N WiensDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Alan McMillanDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Nathan S ArtzDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Luke M FunkDepartment of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Guilherme M CamposDepartment of Surgery, Medical College of Virginia, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, Virginia, USA.
Jacob A GreenbergDepartment of Surgery, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Anthony GamstComputational and Applied Statistics Laboratory, Supercomputer Center, University of California - San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Michael S MiddletonLiver Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, University of California - San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Jeffrey B SchwimmerDivision of Gastroenterology; Hepatology and Nutrition; Department of Pediatrics, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Scott B ReederDepartments of Radiology, Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering, Medicine, and Emergency Medicine, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Claude B SirlinLiver Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, University of California - San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA. csirlin1@gmail.com.
University of California, San Diego · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · USSan Diego Supercomputer Center · USRady Children's Hospital-San Diego · USVirginia Commonwealth University Medical Center · USWilliam S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital · US

Funding

Technical Validation of MRI Biomarkers of Liver FatR01DK088925 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI REEDER, SCOTT B., SIRLIN, CLAUDE B · 2010 to 2021
$7.1M
Traning Clinical Scientists in Radiological ImagingT32EB005970 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI Eric Y Chang, Rebecca Ann Rakow-Penner · 2007 to 2026
$3.2M
Technical Development of Quantitative Biomarkers of Fatty Liver Disease with MRIR01DK083380 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI REEDER, SCOTT B. · 2010 to 2013
$1.2M
Identifying and Addressing Barriers to Bariatric Surgery within VAIK2HX002064 · VA · WM S. MIDDLETON MEMORIAL VETERANS HOSP · PI FUNK, LUKE M · 2018 to 2020
–
HSRD VA IK2 HX002064NIBIB NIH HHS T32 EB005970NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK083380NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK088925NIH HHS R01 DK088925
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare longitudinal hepatic proton density fat fraction (PDFF) changes estimated by magnitude- vs. complex-based chemical-shift-encoded MRI during a weight loss surgery (WLS) program in severely obese adults with biopsy-proven nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

methodsThis was a secondary analysis of a prospective dual-center longitudinal study of 54 adults (44 women; mean age 52 years; range 27-70 years) with obesity, biopsy-proven NAFLD, and baseline PDFF ≥ 5%, enrolled in a WLS program. PDFF was estimated by confounder-corrected chemical-shift-encoded MRI using magnitude (MRI-M)- and complex (MRI-C)-based techniques at baseline (visit 1), after a 2- to 4-week very low-calorie diet (visit 2), and at 1, 3, and 6 months (visits 3 to 5) after surgery. At each visit, PDFF values estimated by MRI-M and MRI-C were compared by a paired t test. Rates of PDFF change estimated by MRI-M and MRI-C for visits 1 to 3, and for visits 3 to 5 were assessed by Bland-Altman analysis and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).

resultsMRI-M PDFF estimates were lower by 0.5-0.7% compared with those of MRI-C at all visits (p < 0.001). There was high agreement and no difference between PDFF change rates estimated by MRI-M vs. MRI-C for visits 1 to 3 (ICC 0.983, 95% CI 0.971, 0.99; bias = - 0.13%, p = 0.22), or visits 3 to 5 (ICC 0.956, 95% CI 0.919-0.977%; bias = 0.03%, p = 0.36).

conclusionAlthough MRI-M underestimates PDFF compared with MRI-C cross-sectionally, this bias is consistent and MRI-M and MRI-C agree in estimating the rate of hepatic PDFF change longitudinally. KEY POINTS: • MRI-M demonstrates a significant but small and consistent bias (0.5-0.7%; p < 0.001) towards underestimation of PDFF compared with MRI-C at 3 T. • Rates of PDFF change estimated by MRI-M and MRI-C agree closely (ICC 0.96-0.98) in adults with severe obesity and biopsy- proven NAFLD enrolled in a weight loss surgery program. • Our findings support the use of either MRI technique (MRI-M or MRI-C) for clinical care or by individual sites or for multi-center trials that include PDFF change as an endpoint. However, since there is a bias in their measurements, the same technique should be used in any given patient for longitudinal follow-up.

Indexed as

Bariatric SurgeryAdultAgedBiopsyFemaleHumansLiverLongitudinal StudiesMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNon-alcoholic Fatty Liver DiseaseObesity, MorbidProspective StudiesProtonsProtonsLongitudinal studyMagnetic resonance imagingNonalcoholic fatty liver disease

Identifiers

PMID32318847
PMCPMC7495399
OpenAlexW3016787931

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.