Literature DB >> 22403781

Clinical assessment of standard and generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisition diffusion imaging: effects of reduction factor and spatial resolution.

J B Andre1, G Zaharchuk, N J Fischbein, M Augustin, S Skare, M Straka, J Rosenberg, M G Lansberg, S Kemp, C A C Wijman, G W Albers, N E Schwartz, R Bammer.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: PI improves routine EPI-based DWI by enabling higher spatial resolution and reducing geometric distortion, though it remains unclear which of these is most important. We evaluated the relative contribution of these factors and assessed their ability to increase lesion conspicuity and diagnostic confidence by using a GRAPPA technique.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four separate DWI scans were obtained at 1.5T in 48 patients with independent variation of in-plane spatial resolution (1.88 mm(2) versus 1.25 mm(2)) and/or reduction factor (R = 1 versus R = 3). A neuroradiologist with access to clinical history and additional imaging sequences provided a reference standard diagnosis for each case. Three blinded neuroradiologists assessed scans for abnormalities and also evaluated multiple imaging-quality metrics by using a 5-point ordinal scale. Logistic regression was used to determine the impact of each factor on subjective image quality and confidence.
RESULTS: Reference standard diagnoses in the patient cohort were acute ischemic stroke (n = 30), ischemic stroke with hemorrhagic conversion (n = 4), intraparenchymal hemorrhage (n = 9), or no acute lesion (n = 5). While readers preferred both a higher reduction factor and a higher spatial resolution, the largest effect was due to an increased reduction factor (odds ratio, 47 ± 16). Small lesions were more confidently discriminated from artifacts on R = 3 images. The diagnosis changed in 5 of 48 scans, always toward the reference standard reading and exclusively for posterior fossa lesions.
CONCLUSIONS: PI improves DWI primarily by reducing geometric distortion rather than by increasing spatial resolution. This outcome leads to a more accurate and confident diagnosis of small lesions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22403781      PMCID: PMC3985834          DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A2980

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol        ISSN: 0195-6108            Impact factor:   3.825


  17 in total

1.  SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fast MRI.

Authors:  K P Pruessmann; M Weiger; M B Scheidegger; P Boesiger
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 4.668

2.  Improved diffusion-weighted single-shot echo-planar imaging (EPI) in stroke using sensitivity encoding (SENSE).

Authors:  R Bammer; S L Keeling; M Augustin; K P Pruessmann; R Wolf; R Stollberger; H P Hartung; F Fazekas
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 4.668

3.  Generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions (GRAPPA).

Authors:  Mark A Griswold; Peter M Jakob; Robin M Heidemann; Mathias Nittka; Vladimir Jellus; Jianmin Wang; Berthold Kiefer; Axel Haase
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 4.668

4.  Patterns of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging associated with etiology improve the accuracy of prognosis after transient ischaemic attack.

Authors:  F Purroy; R Begué; M I Gil; A Quílez; J Sanahuja; L Brieva; G Piñol-Ripoll
Journal:  Eur J Neurol       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 6.089

5.  Clinical multishot DW-EPI through parallel imaging with considerations of susceptibility, motion, and noise.

Authors:  Stefan Skare; Rexford D Newbould; David B Clayton; Gregory W Albers; Scott Nagle; Roland Bammer
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 4.668

6.  Homodyne detection in magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  D C Noll; D G Nishimura; A Macovski
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 10.048

7.  Fast imaging using subencoding data sets from multiple detectors.

Authors:  J B Ra; C Y Rim
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 4.668

8.  Sensitivity encoding for diffusion-weighted MR imaging at 3.0 T: intraindividual comparative study.

Authors:  Christiane K Kuhl; Jürgen Gieseke; Marcus von Falkenhausen; Jochen Textor; Sunhild Gernert; Christiane Sonntag; Hans H Schild
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Clinical application of readout-segmented- echo-planar imaging for diffusion-weighted imaging in pediatric brain.

Authors:  S J Holdsworth; K Yeom; S Skare; A J Gentles; P D Barnes; R Bammer
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2011-05-19       Impact factor: 3.825

10.  Evaluation of the clinical-diffusion and perfusion-diffusion mismatch models in DEFUSE.

Authors:  Maarten G Lansberg; Vincent N Thijs; Scott Hamilton; Gottfried Schlaug; Roland Bammer; Stephanie Kemp; Gregory W Albers
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2007-05-10       Impact factor: 7.914

View more
  3 in total

1.  Diagnosis of DWI-negative acute ischemic stroke: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Brian L Edlow; Shelley Hurwitz; Jonathan A Edlow
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 9.910

2.  Intensity-Corrected Dual-Echo Echo-Planar Imaging (DE-EPI) for Improved Pediatric Brain Diffusion Imaging.

Authors:  Kristen W Yeom; Matus Straka; Michael Iv; Michael E Moseley; Patrick D Barnes; Stefan Skare; Samantha J Holdsworth
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-12       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Utility of diffusion weighted imaging with the quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient in diagnosing residual or recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after transarterial chemoembolization: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhao Liu; Jin-Ming Fan; Chen He; Zhi-Fan Li; Yong-Sheng Xu; Zhao Li; Hai-Feng Liu; Jun-Qiang Lei
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2020-01-06       Impact factor: 3.909

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.