PURPOSE: To evaluate the capability of flow-sensitive black blood (FSBB) acquisition to visualize the lenticulostriate artery (LSA) in comparison with time-of-flight (TOF) angiography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one healthy subjects (13 males and 8 females, 19-44 years old) were enrolled in this study after obtaining written informed consent. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations were performed with FSBB and TOF to visualize the LSA using a 1.5T MRI unit. In FSBB acquisition a motion probing gradient of b = 4 sec/mm(2) was applied to dephase blood flow. Images were reconstructed into coronal sections and were evaluated in terms of number, length, and image quality at origins and distal areas of visualized LSA branches with a four-point scale. RESULTS: In all, 145 LSA branches were visualized with FSBB and 66 branches with TOF. There was no LSA visualized only with TOF. In all evaluated terms, FSBB was significantly better than TOF. CONCLUSION: We could better visualize the LSA with FSBB than with TOF, both quantitatively and qualitatively. FSBB is a promising method, although it remains to be evaluated in clinical cases.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the capability of flow-sensitive black blood (FSBB) acquisition to visualize the lenticulostriate artery (LSA) in comparison with time-of-flight (TOF) angiography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one healthy subjects (13 males and 8 females, 19-44 years old) were enrolled in this study after obtaining written informed consent. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations were performed with FSBB and TOF to visualize the LSA using a 1.5T MRI unit. In FSBB acquisition a motion probing gradient of b = 4 sec/mm(2) was applied to dephase blood flow. Images were reconstructed into coronal sections and were evaluated in terms of number, length, and image quality at origins and distal areas of visualized LSA branches with a four-point scale. RESULTS: In all, 145 LSA branches were visualized with FSBB and 66 branches with TOF. There was no LSA visualized only with TOF. In all evaluated terms, FSBB was significantly better than TOF. CONCLUSION: We could better visualize the LSA with FSBB than with TOF, both quantitatively and qualitatively. FSBB is a promising method, although it remains to be evaluated in clinical cases.
Authors: K Murayama; S Suzuki; H Nagata; J Oda; I Nakahara; K Katada; K Fujii; H Toyama Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-12-19 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: S Okuchi; T Okada; M Ihara; K Gotoh; A Kido; K Fujimoto; A Yamamoto; M Kanagaki; S Tanaka; R Takahashi; K Togashi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-10-11 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: K Gotoh; T Okada; N Satogami; M Yakami; J C Takahashi; K Yoshida; A Ishii; S Tanaka; S Miyamoto; K Togashi Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2012-06-27 Impact factor: 3.039