TY - JOUR
T1 - Quantitative, Organ-Specific Interscanner and Intrascanner Variability for 3 T Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging in a Multicenter, Multivendor Study
AU - Schlett, Christopher L.
AU - Hendel, Thomas
AU - Hirsch, Jochen
AU - Weckbach, Sabine
AU - Caspers, Svenja
AU - Schulz-Menger, Jeanette
AU - Ittermann, Till
AU - Von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff, Florian
AU - Ladd, Susanne C.
AU - Moebus, Susanne
AU - Stroszczynski, Christian
AU - Fischer, Beate
AU - Leitzmann, Michael
AU - Kuhl, Christiane
AU - Pessler, Frank
AU - Hartung, Dagmar
AU - Kemmling, Yvonne
AU - Hetterich, Holger
AU - Amunts, Katrin
AU - Günther, Matthias
AU - Wacker, Frank
AU - Rummeny, Ernst
AU - Kauczor, Hans Ulrich
AU - Forsting, Michael
AU - Völzke, Henry
AU - Hosten, Norbert
AU - Reiser, Maximilian F.
AU - Bamberg, Fabian
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2016/4/1
Y1 - 2016/4/1
N2 - Introduction Whole-body magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is increasingly implemented in population-based cohorts and clinical settings. However, to quantify the variability introduced by the different scanners is essential to make conclusions about clinical and biological data, and relevant for internal/external validity. Thus, we determined the interscanner and intrascanner variability of different 3 T MR scanners for whole-body imaging. Methods Thirty volunteers were enrolled to undergo multicentric, interscanner as well intrascanner imaging as part of the German National Cohort pilot studies. A comprehensive whole-body MR protocol was installed at 9 sites including 7 different MR scanner models by all 4 major vendors. A set of quantitative, organ-specific measures (n = 20; eg, volume of brain's gray/white matter, pulmonary trunk diameter, vertebral body height) were obtained in blinded fashion. Reproducibility was determined using mean weighted relative differences and intraclass correlation coefficients. Results All participants (44 ± 14 years, 50% female) successfully completed the imaging protocol except for two because of technical issues. Mean scan time was 2 hours and 32 minutes and differed significantly across scanners (range, 1 hour 59 minutes to 3 hours 12 minutes). A higher reproducibility of obtained measurements was observed for intrascanner than for interscanner comparisons (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.80 ± 0.17 vs 0.60 ± 0.31, P = 0.005, respectively). In the interscanner comparison, mean relative difference ranged from 1.0% to 53.2%. Conversely, in the intrascanner comparison, mean relative difference ranged from 0.1% to 15.6%. There were no statistical differences for intrascanner and interscanner reproducibility between the different organ foci (all P ≥ 0.24). Conclusions While whole-body MR imaging-derived, organ-specific parameters are generally associated with good to excellent reproducibility, smaller differences are obtained when using identical MR scanner models by a single vendor.
AB - Introduction Whole-body magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is increasingly implemented in population-based cohorts and clinical settings. However, to quantify the variability introduced by the different scanners is essential to make conclusions about clinical and biological data, and relevant for internal/external validity. Thus, we determined the interscanner and intrascanner variability of different 3 T MR scanners for whole-body imaging. Methods Thirty volunteers were enrolled to undergo multicentric, interscanner as well intrascanner imaging as part of the German National Cohort pilot studies. A comprehensive whole-body MR protocol was installed at 9 sites including 7 different MR scanner models by all 4 major vendors. A set of quantitative, organ-specific measures (n = 20; eg, volume of brain's gray/white matter, pulmonary trunk diameter, vertebral body height) were obtained in blinded fashion. Reproducibility was determined using mean weighted relative differences and intraclass correlation coefficients. Results All participants (44 ± 14 years, 50% female) successfully completed the imaging protocol except for two because of technical issues. Mean scan time was 2 hours and 32 minutes and differed significantly across scanners (range, 1 hour 59 minutes to 3 hours 12 minutes). A higher reproducibility of obtained measurements was observed for intrascanner than for interscanner comparisons (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.80 ± 0.17 vs 0.60 ± 0.31, P = 0.005, respectively). In the interscanner comparison, mean relative difference ranged from 1.0% to 53.2%. Conversely, in the intrascanner comparison, mean relative difference ranged from 0.1% to 15.6%. There were no statistical differences for intrascanner and interscanner reproducibility between the different organ foci (all P ≥ 0.24). Conclusions While whole-body MR imaging-derived, organ-specific parameters are generally associated with good to excellent reproducibility, smaller differences are obtained when using identical MR scanner models by a single vendor.
KW - 3 T magnetic resonance tomography
KW - German National Cohort
KW - population-based imaging
KW - reproducibility
KW - variability
KW - whole-body imaging
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84949472366&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000237
DO - 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000237
M3 - Article
C2 - 26646309
AN - SCOPUS:84949472366
SN - 0020-9996
VL - 51
SP - 255
EP - 265
JO - Investigative Radiology
JF - Investigative Radiology
IS - 4
ER -