Highly Reproducible, Vendor‐Agnostic, Motion‐Insensitive Liver PDFF Mapping at 0.55T , 1.5T , and 3T

作者：Jiayi Tang, Daiki Tamada, Jon‐Fredrik Nielsen, Jitka Starekova, Julius F. Heidenreich, Felix Schön, Alexandra Anagnostopoulos, Amirhossein Roshanshad, Lu Mao, Shohei Fujita, Pengcheng Xu, Christopher E. Keen, Imam Ahmed Shaik, Eugene Milshteyn, S. Yee, Andrew Ellison, David Rutkowski, Jeff Kammerman, Jean H. Brittain, Xiaodong Zhong, William A. Grissom, Maxim Zaitsev, Aaron L. Carrel, Yogesh Rathi, Yun Jiang, Berkin Bilgiç, Scott B. Reeder, Diego Hernando · 发表于：Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 年份：2025 · DOI：10.1002/mrm.70223 · 被引用次数：2 · 研究领域：Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis、Liver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment、Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications

ABSTRACT Purpose To develop and validate a vendor‐agnostic, motion‐insensitive proton‐density fat‐fraction (PDFF) quantification method. Methods Flip‐angle‐modulated (FAM) 2D chemical‐shift‐encoded (CSE) MRI for PDFF quantification was implemented in both the vendor‐agnostic platform Pulseq (“Pulseq‐FAM”) and one vendor‐specific platform (“GE‐specific FAM”). These implementations were distributed to four sites with twelve MR systems of three vendors (Siemens/GE/Philips) and field strengths (0.55T/1.5T/3T). A sequentially‐shipped 16‐vial phantom (PDFF = 0%–30%/T1 water = 200–1400 ms) underwent confounder‐corrected PDFF mapping with commercial 3D‐CSE methods and GE‐specific FAM as available on each system, and Pulseq‐FAM on every system. To assess bias, phantom PDFF measurements were compared to reference. Between‐system variance was evaluated with linear mixed‐effects modeling. Different volunteers were also imaged at each site to assess free‐breathing PDFF mapping feasibility. A prospective single‐site volunteer study was also conducted. Adult patients and children were imaged with breath‐held 3D‐CSE and free‐breathing GE‐specific and Pulseq‐FAM. Radiologists evaluated images for overall quality and motion artifacts. To assess bias, Pulseq‐FAM PDFF measurements were compared to 3D‐CSE and GE‐specific FAM. Test–retest repeatability was assessed by re‐imaging after repositioning. Between‐field‐strength reproducibility was assessed at 1.5T and 3.0T. Results In the multi‐center s...