BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: FLAIR images are highly sensitive for SAH. However, CSF flow artifacts caused by conventional FLAIR can produce false-positive results. Here, we compare 3D and 3D FLAIR sequences, focusing on their potential for containing these artifacts and their sensitivity and specificity for detection of SAHs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated the following 4 FLAIR sequences: 1) 2D FLAIR at 1.5T, 2) 2D FLAIR, 3) 2D PROPELLER-FLAIR, and 4) 3D Cube-FLAIR at 3T. All sequences were performed in 5 healthy volunteers; sequences 2 and 4 were also performed under routine conditions in 10 patients with focal epilepsy and in 10 patients with SAH. Two neuroradiologists independently conducted the analysis. The presence of flow artifacts in the ventricles and cisterns of healthy volunteers and patients with epilepsy was evaluated and scored on a 4-point scale. Mean values were calculated and compared by using paired t tests. Sensitivity and specificity for SAH detection in sequences 2 and 4 were determined. RESULTS: Cube-FLAIR showed almost no CSF artifacts in the volunteers and the patients with epilepsy; therefore, it was superior to any other FLAIR (P < .001). Sensitivity and specificity of SAH detection by 3T FLAIR were 58.3% and 89.4%, respectively, whereas Cube-FLAIR had a sensitivity of 95% and a specificity of 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Cube-FLAIR allows FLAIR imaging with almost no CSF artifacts and is, thus, particularly useful for SAH detection.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: FLAIR images are highly sensitive for SAH. However, CSF flow artifacts caused by conventional FLAIR can produce false-positive results. Here, we compare 3D and 3D FLAIR sequences, focusing on their potential for containing these artifacts and their sensitivity and specificity for detection of SAHs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated the following 4 FLAIR sequences: 1) 2D FLAIR at 1.5T, 2) 2D FLAIR, 3) 2D PROPELLER-FLAIR, and 4) 3D Cube-FLAIR at 3T. All sequences were performed in 5 healthy volunteers; sequences 2 and 4 were also performed under routine conditions in 10 patients with focal epilepsy and in 10 patients with SAH. Two neuroradiologists independently conducted the analysis. The presence of flow artifacts in the ventricles and cisterns of healthy volunteers and patients with epilepsy was evaluated and scored on a 4-point scale. Mean values were calculated and compared by using paired t tests. Sensitivity and specificity for SAH detection in sequences 2 and 4 were determined. RESULTS: Cube-FLAIR showed almost no CSF artifacts in the volunteers and the patients with epilepsy; therefore, it was superior to any other FLAIR (P < .001). Sensitivity and specificity of SAH detection by 3T FLAIR were 58.3% and 89.4%, respectively, whereas Cube-FLAIR had a sensitivity of 95% and a specificity of 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Cube-FLAIR allows FLAIR imaging with almost no CSF artifacts and is, thus, particularly useful for SAH detection.
Authors: A Oatridge; W L Curati; A H Herlihy; J V Hajnal; N Virji; B K Puri; G M Bydder Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2001 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: Martin Wiesmann; Thomas E Mayer; Indra Yousry; Ralph Medele; Gerhard F Hamann; Hartmut Brückmann Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: A H Herlihy; J V Hajnal; W L Curati; N Virji; A Oatridge; B K Puri; G M Bydder Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Chelsea S Kidwell; Julio A Chalela; Jeffrey L Saver; Sidney Starkman; Michael D Hill; Andrew M Demchuk; John A Butman; Nicholas Patronas; Jeffry R Alger; Lawrence L Latour; Marie L Luby; Alison E Baird; Megan C Leary; Margaret Tremwel; Bruce Ovbiagele; Andre Fredieu; Shuichi Suzuki; J Pablo Villablanca; Stephen Davis; Billy Dunn; Jason W Todd; Mustapha A Ezzeddine; Joseph Haymore; John K Lynch; Lisa Davis; Steven Warach Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-10-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Yoshimi Anzai; Makiko Ishikawa; Dennis W W Shaw; Alan Artru; Vasily Yarnykh; Kenneth R Maravilla Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Jeong Sub Lee; Ji Kang Park; Seung Hyoung Kim; Sun Young Jeong; Bong Soo Kim; Gukmyoung Choi; Mu Suk Lee; Su Yeon Ko; Im-Kyung Hwang Journal: J Neurol Date: 2014-02-26 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: J Hodel; R Aboukais; B Dutouquet; E Kalsoum; M A Benadjaoud; D Chechin; M Zins; A Rahmouni; A Luciani; J-P Pruvo; J-P Lejeune; X Leclerc Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-09-11 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Sjoerd B Vos; Caroline Micallef; Frederik Barkhof; Andrea Hill; Gavin P Winston; Sebastien Ourselin; John S Duncan Journal: J Neuroradiol Date: 2018-03-02 Impact factor: 3.447