Influence of arterial input function (AIF) on quantitative prostate dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI and zonal...

Reproducibility of quantitative perfusion analysis of DCE requires a standardized AIF acquisition. However, there are many different approaches for AIF assessment so that the absolute values of perfusion parameters may vary depending on the used method. This study analyzes the influence of the method of AIF determination on quantitative DCE-MRI.

In this retrospective, single-center, cohort study three different methods of AIF determination in 50 consecutive patients with multiparametric MRI of the prostate were conducted. As a reference, AIF was selected manually by defining a region of interest in an artery manually (AIF_m). The second method (AIF_a), based on an automated algorithm and the third, population-derived AIF_p where then compared. Primary endpoint were differences in the performance of the perfusion parameters K^trans, ve and k_ep regarding the AIF acquisition methods, secondary endpoints consisted of the evaluation of differences in the peripheral and transition zone of the prostate (PZ, TZ).

In all three methods, K^trans, ve, and k_ep were significantly higher in PZ than in TZ with K^trans showing least overlapping. There were no significant differences for K^trans determined with AIF_m and AIF_a (0.3 ± 0.2 min^-1 for PZ for both and 0.5 ± 0.3 min^-1 for TZ in AIF_m and 0.4 ± 0.3 min^-1 in AIF_a), while there were great differences between AIF_a and AIF_p and AIF_m and AIF_p (0.1 ± 0.03 min^-1 for TZ and PZ in AIF_p). Spearman test demonstrated good correlation of values for K^trans and k_ep in all 3 methods (ρ ≥ 0.76). AIF_a showed a success rate of 98% in finding the artery.

AIF_a is a recommendable user-independent automatical method to determine quantitative perfusion parameters allowing an objective measurement and saving interactive time for the radiologist. AIF_p may be applied as second alternative method.