ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
Impact of hepatic steatosis and MOLLI acquisition parameters on liver T1 estimates.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Water-T1, PDFF, and T2* mapping of the liver using chemical shift-encoded MOLLI.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the influence of hepatic fat content and sequence acquisition parameters on Modified Look-Locker Inversion Recovery (MOLLI)-based liver T1 estimates, comparing balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP) and spoiled gradient recalled echo (SPGR) readouts under in-phase (IP), opposed-phase (OP), and fat-suppressed (FS) conditions.
methodsTwenty participants (5 controls, 11 with hepatic steatosis, 4 with other chronic liver diseases; median age 15 years, range 10-28) underwent abdominal MRI at 1.5T. Six single-slice MOLLI acquisitions (bSSFP and SPGR; IP, OP, FS) were performed to obtain hepatic T1 maps. A 3D multi-echo confounder-corrected chemical shift encoded (mDIXON Quant
resultsLiver PDFF ranged from 1 to 43% (median 4.6%). Agreement between bSSFP and SPGR T1 estimates was excellent (ICC ≥ 0.90), though SPGR estimated higher T1 values than bSSFP by 30-60 ms, with greater variability. T1-OP differed significantly from T1-IP and T1-FS (both p < 0.0001) and showed significant PDFF-related mean difference, in line with simulation results, while T1-FS and T1-IP estimates showed excellent agreement (ICC ≥ 0.89). Regression analysis showed that bSSFP T1-OP correlated very strongly with PDFF (r = 0.81; +7.8 ms/%PDFF), whereas T1-IP showed a strong negative correlation (r = - 0.79; - 5.0 ms/%PDFF), and T1-FS demonstrated only a moderate negative correlation (r=-0.48; -3.1ms/%PDFF). SPGR based T1 estimates exhibited similar correlations with PDFF. In participants without steatosis, T1 values were consistent across all acquisitions.
conclusionLiver MOLLI T1 estimates are strongly influenced by hepatic fat content and acquisition parameters, particularly for OP acquisitions. IP and FS MOLLI acquisitions provide more reliable estimates across fat fractions. These findings support prioritization of IP or FS strategies in clinical and research liver T1 mapping protocols and underscore the need for fat-corrected or water-specific approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.