Comparison of two magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy postprocessing methods

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Rodrigues,Thaísa Malbar
Data de Publicação: 2021
Outros Autores: Escobar,Thayssa Dalla Costa, Souza,Rodrigo Stênio Moll de, Nakamura-Palacios,Ester Miyuki, Rosa-Júnior,Marcos
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302021001201616
Resumo: SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the results obtained using SpectroView® (SV) and J-Magnetic Resonance User Interface (jMRUI) from the same magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopy of hydrogen data. METHODS: Data from 23 males with alcohol use disorder (AUD) and 23 healthy non-AUD males were acquired by a 1.5 Tesla MR using a PRESS sequence (TE=30 ms) in four voxels located in the right frontal and left frontal (RF and LF) lobes, and posterior cingulate (AC and PC). The ratio of the signals from both N-acetyl-aspartate (NAA) and choline (Cho) over creatine (Cr) was calculated automatically using SV and semiautomatically by an expert neuroradiologist using jMRUI. The software’ agreement was calculated by the 95% limits of agreement (LoA) of the ratio of the obtained values. RESULTS: The standard deviation was greater in jMRUI than in SV. Although there was a correlation between the results from both methods, it was not possible to predict their variance from one another. Additionally, the 95% LoA showed that jMRUI values were expected to vary from 38 to 190% of those obtained using SV for NAA/Cr in RF of AUD subjects and from 48 to 196% for NAA/Cr in CA of non-AUD individuals. CONCLUSIONS: The difference between the methods may represent clinically significant magnitudes. We suggest the use of the same method when comparing spectroscopic data. We also suggest that in clinical practice, the automatic method should be preferred.
id AMB-1_ce0fe86e2526b3a1018a85d1b07dd261
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0104-42302021001201616
network_acronym_str AMB-1
network_name_str Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Comparison of two magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy postprocessing methodsMagnetic resonance spectroscopyAlcoholismSUMMARY OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the results obtained using SpectroView® (SV) and J-Magnetic Resonance User Interface (jMRUI) from the same magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopy of hydrogen data. METHODS: Data from 23 males with alcohol use disorder (AUD) and 23 healthy non-AUD males were acquired by a 1.5 Tesla MR using a PRESS sequence (TE=30 ms) in four voxels located in the right frontal and left frontal (RF and LF) lobes, and posterior cingulate (AC and PC). The ratio of the signals from both N-acetyl-aspartate (NAA) and choline (Cho) over creatine (Cr) was calculated automatically using SV and semiautomatically by an expert neuroradiologist using jMRUI. The software’ agreement was calculated by the 95% limits of agreement (LoA) of the ratio of the obtained values. RESULTS: The standard deviation was greater in jMRUI than in SV. Although there was a correlation between the results from both methods, it was not possible to predict their variance from one another. Additionally, the 95% LoA showed that jMRUI values were expected to vary from 38 to 190% of those obtained using SV for NAA/Cr in RF of AUD subjects and from 48 to 196% for NAA/Cr in CA of non-AUD individuals. CONCLUSIONS: The difference between the methods may represent clinically significant magnitudes. We suggest the use of the same method when comparing spectroscopic data. We also suggest that in clinical practice, the automatic method should be preferred.Associação Médica Brasileira2021-11-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302021001201616Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira v.67 n.11 2021reponame:Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)instname:Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)instacron:AMB10.1590/1806-9282.20210676info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessRodrigues,Thaísa MalbarEscobar,Thayssa Dalla CostaSouza,Rodrigo Stênio Moll deNakamura-Palacios,Ester MiyukiRosa-Júnior,Marcoseng2021-12-10T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0104-42302021001201616Revistahttps://ramb.amb.org.br/ultimas-edicoes/#https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||ramb@amb.org.br1806-92820104-4230opendoar:2021-12-10T00:00Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online) - Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison of two magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy postprocessing methods
title Comparison of two magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy postprocessing methods
spellingShingle Comparison of two magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy postprocessing methods
Rodrigues,Thaísa Malbar
Magnetic resonance spectroscopy
Alcoholism
title_short Comparison of two magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy postprocessing methods
title_full Comparison of two magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy postprocessing methods
title_fullStr Comparison of two magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy postprocessing methods
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of two magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy postprocessing methods
title_sort Comparison of two magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy postprocessing methods
author Rodrigues,Thaísa Malbar
author_facet Rodrigues,Thaísa Malbar
Escobar,Thayssa Dalla Costa
Souza,Rodrigo Stênio Moll de
Nakamura-Palacios,Ester Miyuki
Rosa-Júnior,Marcos
author_role author
author2 Escobar,Thayssa Dalla Costa
Souza,Rodrigo Stênio Moll de
Nakamura-Palacios,Ester Miyuki
Rosa-Júnior,Marcos
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Rodrigues,Thaísa Malbar
Escobar,Thayssa Dalla Costa
Souza,Rodrigo Stênio Moll de
Nakamura-Palacios,Ester Miyuki
Rosa-Júnior,Marcos
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Magnetic resonance spectroscopy
Alcoholism
topic Magnetic resonance spectroscopy
Alcoholism
description SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the results obtained using SpectroView® (SV) and J-Magnetic Resonance User Interface (jMRUI) from the same magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopy of hydrogen data. METHODS: Data from 23 males with alcohol use disorder (AUD) and 23 healthy non-AUD males were acquired by a 1.5 Tesla MR using a PRESS sequence (TE=30 ms) in four voxels located in the right frontal and left frontal (RF and LF) lobes, and posterior cingulate (AC and PC). The ratio of the signals from both N-acetyl-aspartate (NAA) and choline (Cho) over creatine (Cr) was calculated automatically using SV and semiautomatically by an expert neuroradiologist using jMRUI. The software’ agreement was calculated by the 95% limits of agreement (LoA) of the ratio of the obtained values. RESULTS: The standard deviation was greater in jMRUI than in SV. Although there was a correlation between the results from both methods, it was not possible to predict their variance from one another. Additionally, the 95% LoA showed that jMRUI values were expected to vary from 38 to 190% of those obtained using SV for NAA/Cr in RF of AUD subjects and from 48 to 196% for NAA/Cr in CA of non-AUD individuals. CONCLUSIONS: The difference between the methods may represent clinically significant magnitudes. We suggest the use of the same method when comparing spectroscopic data. We also suggest that in clinical practice, the automatic method should be preferred.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-11-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302021001201616
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-42302021001201616
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/1806-9282.20210676
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Médica Brasileira
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Médica Brasileira
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira v.67 n.11 2021
reponame:Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
instname:Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)
instacron:AMB
instname_str Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)
instacron_str AMB
institution AMB
reponame_str Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
collection Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira (Online) - Associação Médica Brasileira (AMB)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||ramb@amb.org.br
_version_ 1754212837001003008