Is Fat Quantification Based on Proton Density Fat Fraction Useful for Differentiating Renal Tumor Types?

Overview

Journal Abdom Radiol (NY)

Publisher Springer

Specialties Gastroenterology
Radiology

Date 2024 Sep 27

PMID 39333411

Authors

Canan Altay

Isil Basara Akin

Hakan Abdullah Ozgul

Volkan Sen

Ozan Bozkurt

Emine Burcin Tuna

Kutsal Yorukoglu

Mustafa Secil

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: This study retrospectively assessed the diagnostic accuracy of fat quantification based on proton density fat fraction (PDFF) for differentiating renal tumors.

Methods: In this retrospective study, 98 histologically confirmed clear cell renal cell carcinomas (ccRCCs), 35 papillary renal cell carcinomas (pRCCs), 14 renal oncocytomas, 16 chromophobe renal cell carcinomas (chRCCs), 10 lymphomas, 19 uroepithelial tumors, 10 lipid-poor angiomyolipomas (AMLs), and 25 lipid-rich AMLs were identified in 226 patients (127 males and 99 females) over 5 years. All patients underwent multiparametric kidney MRI. The MRI protocol included an axial plane and a volumetric 3D fat fraction sequence known as mDIXON-Quant for PDFF measurement. Demographic data were recorded, and PDFF values were independently reviewed by two radiologists blinded to pathologic results. MRI examinations were performed using a 1.5 T system. MRI-PDFF measurements were obtained from the solid parts of all renal tumors. Fat quantification was performed using a standard region of interest for each tumor, compared to histopathological diagnoses. Sensitivity and specificity analyses were performed to calculate the diagnostic accuracy for each histopathological tumor type. Nonparametric variables were compared among the subgroups using the Kruskal-Wallis H test and Mann Whitney U test. P-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results: In all, 102 patients underwent partial nephrectomy, 70 patients underwent radical nephrectomy, and the remaining 54 had biopsies. Patient age (mean: 58.11 years; range: 18-87 years) and tumor size (mean: 29.5 mm; range: 14-147 mm) did not significantly differ across groups. All measurements exhibited good interobserver agreement. The mean ccRCC MRI-PDFF was 12.6 ± 5.06% (range: 11.58-13.61%), the mean pRCC MRI-PDFF was 2.72 ± 2.42% (range: 2.12-3.32%), and the mean chRCC MRI-PDFF was 1.8 ± 1.4% (range: 1.09-2.5%). Clear cell RCCs presented a significantly higher fat ratio than other RCC types, uroepithelial tumors, lymphomas, and lipid-poor AMLs (p < 0.05). Lipid-rich AMLs demonstrated a very high fat ratio.

Conclusion: MRI-PDFF facilitated accurate differentiation of ccRCCs from other renal tumors with high sensitivity and specificity.

References

Ramamurthy N, Moosavi B, McInnes M, Flood T, Schieda N . Multiparametric MRI of solid renal masses: pearls and pitfalls. Clin Radiol. 2014; 70(3):304-16. DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2014.10.006. View

Vendrami C, Villavicencio C, DeJulio T, Chatterjee A, Casalino D, Horowitz J . Differentiation of Solid Renal Tumors with Multiparametric MR Imaging. Radiographics. 2017; 37(7):2026-2042. DOI: 10.1148/rg.2017170039. View

Kirkpatrick I, Brahm G, Mnatzakanian G, Hurrell C, Herts B, Bird J . Recommendations for the Management of the Incidental Renal Mass in Adults: Endorsement and Adaptation of the 2017 ACR Incidental Findings Committee White Paper by the Canadian Association of Radiologists Incidental Findings Working Group. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2019; 70(2):125-133. DOI: 10.1016/j.carj.2019.03.002. View

Ale Ali H, Couch M, Menezes R, Evans A, Finelli A, Jewett M . Predictive Value of In Vivo MR Spectroscopy With Semilocalization by Adiabatic Selective Refocusing in Differentiating Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma From Other Subtypes. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020; 214(4):817-824. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.19.22023. View

Perez-Ordonez B, Hamed G, Campbell S, Erlandson R, Russo P, Gaudin P . Renal oncocytoma: a clinicopathologic study of 70 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 1997; 21(8):871-83. DOI: 10.1097/00000478-199708000-00001. View

Cornelis F, Grenier N . Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Solid Renal Tumors: A Practical Algorithm. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2017; 38(1):47-58. DOI: 10.1053/j.sult.2016.08.009. View

Cornelis F, Tricaud E, Lasserre A, Petitpierre F, Bernhard J, Le Bras Y . Routinely performed multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging helps to differentiate common subtypes of renal tumours. Eur Radiol. 2014; 24(5):1068-80. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-014-3107-z. View

Nguyen T, Gupta A, Bhatt S . Multimodality imaging of renal lymphoma and its mimics. Insights Imaging. 2022; 13(1):131. PMC: 9375790. DOI: 10.1186/s13244-022-01260-1. View

Aydogan C, Cansu A, Aydogan Z, Erdemi S, Teymur A, Bektas O . Diagnostic performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the differentiation of clear cell renal cell cancer. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2023; 48(7):2349-2360. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-023-03882-5. View

10.

Laothamatas I, Al Mubarak H, Reddy A, Wax R, Badani K, Taouli B . Multiparametric MRI of Solid Renal Masses: Principles and Applications of Advanced Quantitative and Functional Methods for Tumor Diagnosis and Characterization. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2023; 58(2):342-359. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.28718. View

11.

Qu Y, Li M, Hamilton G, Zhang Y, Song B . Diagnostic accuracy of hepatic proton density fat fraction measured by magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of liver steatosis with histology as reference standard: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2019; 29(10):5180-5189. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06071-5. View

12.

Hamilton G, Yokoo T, Bydder M, Cruite I, Schroeder M, Sirlin C . In vivo characterization of the liver fat ¹H MR spectrum. NMR Biomed. 2011; 24(7):784-90. PMC: 3860876. DOI: 10.1002/nbm.1622. View

13.

Meisamy S, Hines C, Hamilton G, Sirlin C, McKenzie C, Yu H . Quantification of hepatic steatosis with T1-independent, T2-corrected MR imaging with spectral modeling of fat: blinded comparison with MR spectroscopy. Radiology. 2011; 258(3):767-75. PMC: 3042638. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10100708. View

14.

Kim K, Song J, Kannengiesser S, Han Y . Hepatic fat quantification using the proton density fat fraction (PDFF): utility of free-drawn-PDFF with a large coverage area. Radiol Med. 2015; 120(12):1083-93. DOI: 10.1007/s11547-015-0545-x. View

15.

Motosugi U, Hernando D, Bannas P, Holmes J, Wang K, Shimakawa A . Quantification of liver fat with respiratory-gated quantitative chemical shift encoded MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015; 42(5):1241-8. PMC: 4591113. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24896. View

16.

Rehm J, Wolfgram P, Hernando D, Eickhoff J, Allen D, Reeder S . Proton density fat-fraction is an accurate biomarker of hepatic steatosis in adolescent girls and young women. Eur Radiol. 2015; 25(10):2921-30. PMC: 4564339. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-015-3724-1. View

17.

Hetterich H, Bayerl C, Peters A, Heier M, Linkohr B, Meisinger C . Feasibility of a three-step magnetic resonance imaging approach for the assessment of hepatic steatosis in an asymptomatic study population. Eur Radiol. 2015; 26(6):1895-904. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-015-3966-y. View

18.

Park C, Hooker C, Hooker J, Bass E, Haufe W, Schlein A . Assessment of a high-SNR chemical-shift-encoded MRI with complex reconstruction for proton density fat fraction (PDFF) estimation overall and in the low-fat range. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018; 49(1):229-238. PMC: 6205914. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.26168. View

19.

Idilman I, Yildiz A, Karaosmanoglu A, Ozmen M, Akata D, Karcaaltincaba M . Proton density fat fraction: magnetic resonance imaging applications beyond the liver. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2022; 28(1):83-91. DOI: 10.5152/dir.2021.21845. View

20.

Young J, Coy H, Kim H, Douek M, Lo P, Pantuck A . Performance of Relative Enhancement on Multiphasic MRI for the Differentiation of Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) From Papillary and Chromophobe RCC Subtypes and Oncocytoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017; 208(4):812-819. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.16.17152. View