Improved liver fat and R 2 * quantification at 0.55 T using locally low-rank denoising

Shu-Fu Shih,Bilal Tasdelen,Ecrin Yagiz,Zhaohuan Zhang,Xiaodong Zhong,Sophia X Cui,Krishna S Nayak,Holden H Wu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.30324
2024-10-09
Abstract:Purpose: To improve liver proton density fat fraction (PDFF) and R 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ quantification at 0.55 T by systematically validating the acquisition parameter choices and investigating the performance of locally low-rank denoising methods. Methods: A Monte Carlo simulation was conducted to design a protocol for PDFF and R 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ mapping at 0.55 T. Using this proposed protocol, we investigated the performance of robust locally low-rank (RLLR) and random matrix theory (RMT) denoising. In a reference phantom, we assessed quantification accuracy (concordance correlation coefficient [ ρ c $$ {\rho}_c $$ ] vs. reference values) and precision (using SD) across scan repetitions. We performed in vivo liver scans (11 subjects) and used regions of interest to compare means and SDs of PDFF and R 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ measurements. Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were performed (p < 0.05 considered significant). Results: In the phantom, RLLR and RMT denoising improved accuracy in PDFF and R 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ with ρ c $$ {\rho}_c $$ >0.992 and improved precision with >67% decrease in SD across 50 scan repetitions versus conventional reconstruction (i.e., no denoising). For in vivo liver scans, the mean PDFF and mean R 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ were not significantly different between the three methods (conventional reconstruction; RLLR and RMT denoising). Without denoising, the SDs of PDFF and R 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ were 8.80% and 14.17 s-1. RLLR denoising significantly reduced the values to 1.79% and 5.31 s-1 (p < 0.001); RMT denoising significantly reduced the values to 2.00% and 4.81 s-1 (p < 0.001). Conclusion: We validated an acquisition protocol for improved PDFF and R 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ quantification at 0.55 T. Both RLLR and RMT denoising improved the accuracy and precision of PDFF and R 2 * $$ {R}_2^{\ast } $$ measurements.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?