PURPOSE: To evaluate and quantify improvements in the quality of fat suppression for fast spin-echo imaging of the knee using multipeak fat spectral modeling and IDEAL fat-water separation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: T(1)-weighted and T(2)-weighted fast spin-echo sequences with IDEAL fat-water separation and two frequency-selective fat-saturation methods (fat-selective saturation and fat-selective partial inversion) were performed on 10 knees of five asymptomatic volunteers. The IDEAL images were reconstructed using a conventional single-peak method and precalibrated and self-calibrated multipeak methods that more accurately model the NMR spectrum of fat. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was measured in various tissues for all sequences. Student t-tests were used to compare SNR values. RESULTS: Precalibrated and self-calibrated multipeak IDEAL had significantly greater suppression of signal (P < 0.05) within subcutaneous fat and bone marrow than fat-selective saturation, fat-selective partial inversion, and single-peak IDEAL for both T(1)-weighted and T(2)-weighted fast spin-echo sequences. For T(1)-weighted fast spin-echo sequences, the improvement in the suppression of signal within subcutaneous fat and bone marrow for multipeak IDEAL ranged between 65% when compared to fat-selective partial inversion to 86% when compared to fat-selectivesaturation. For T2-weighted fast spin-echo sequences, the improvement for multipeak IDEAL ranged between 21% when compared to fat-selective partial inversion to 81% when compared to fat-selective saturation. CONCLUSION: Multipeak IDEAL fat-water separation provides improved fat suppression for T(1)-weighted and T(2)-weighted fast spin-echo imaging of the knee when compared to single-peak IDEAL and two widely used frequency-selected fat-saturation methods.
PURPOSE: To evaluate and quantify improvements in the quality of fat suppression for fast spin-echo imaging of the knee using multipeak fat spectral modeling and IDEAL fat-water separation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: T(1)-weighted and T(2)-weighted fast spin-echo sequences with IDEAL fat-water separation and two frequency-selective fat-saturation methods (fat-selective saturation and fat-selective partial inversion) were performed on 10 knees of five asymptomatic volunteers. The IDEAL images were reconstructed using a conventional single-peak method and precalibrated and self-calibrated multipeak methods that more accurately model the NMR spectrum of fat. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was measured in various tissues for all sequences. Student t-tests were used to compare SNR values. RESULTS: Precalibrated and self-calibrated multipeak IDEAL had significantly greater suppression of signal (P < 0.05) within subcutaneous fat and bone marrow than fat-selective saturation, fat-selective partial inversion, and single-peak IDEAL for both T(1)-weighted and T(2)-weighted fast spin-echo sequences. For T(1)-weighted fast spin-echo sequences, the improvement in the suppression of signal within subcutaneous fat and bone marrow for multipeak IDEAL ranged between 65% when compared to fat-selective partial inversion to 86% when compared to fat-selectivesaturation. For T2-weighted fast spin-echo sequences, the improvement for multipeak IDEAL ranged between 21% when compared to fat-selective partial inversion to 81% when compared to fat-selective saturation. CONCLUSION: Multipeak IDEAL fat-water separation provides improved fat suppression for T(1)-weighted and T(2)-weighted fast spin-echo imaging of the knee when compared to single-peak IDEAL and two widely used frequency-selected fat-saturation methods.
Authors: Mark Bydder; Takeshi Yokoo; Gavin Hamilton; Michael S Middleton; Alyssa D Chavez; Jeffrey B Schwimmer; Joel E Lavine; Claude B Sirlin Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2008-02-21 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Scott B Reeder; Charles A McKenzie; Angel R Pineda; Huanzhou Yu; Ann Shimakawa; Anja C Brau; Brian A Hargreaves; Garry E Gold; Jean H Brittain Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Venkata V Chebrolu; Huanzhou Yu; Angel R Pineda; Charles A McKenzie; Jean H Brittain; Scott B Reeder Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Catherine J Moran; Ethan K Brodsky; Leah Henze Bancroft; Scott B Reeder; Huanzhou Yu; Richard Kijowski; Dorothee Engel; Walter F Block Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2013-03-15 Impact factor: 4.668