Yee Liang Thian1, Wanying Xie2, David A Porter3, Bertrand Weileng Ang4. 1. Department of Diagnostic Imaging, National University Hospital Singapore, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Rd, Singapore 119074 Singapore. Electronic address: ylthian@gmail.com. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 3. Imaging and IT Division, Healthcare Sector, Siemens AG, Erlangen, Germany. 4. Department of Diagnostic Imaging, National University Hospital Singapore, 5 Lower Kent Ridge Rd, Singapore 119074 Singapore.
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) of the pelvis at 3T is prone to artifacts that diminish the image quality. Readout-segmented echo-planar imaging (RS-EPI) is a new DWI technique that can reduce the artifacts associated with standard single-shot echo-planar imaging (SS-EPI) DWI. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and image quality of RS-EPI in pelvic DWI compared to SS-EPI on a 3T imaging system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty patients underwent pelvic DWI on a 3T scanner with SS-EPI and RS-EPI techniques. Two blinded readers independently assessed each set of images for geometric distortion, image blurring, ghosting artifacts, lesion conspicuity, and overall image quality on a 7-point scale. Qualitative image scores were compared using paired Wilcoxon signed rank test. Interreader correlation was assessed by Spearman rank correlation. RESULTS: Geometric distortion, imaging blurring, ghosting artifacts, lesion conspicuity, and overall image quality were rated significantly better by both readers for RS-EPI technique (P < .01 for all parameters). There was moderate-high correlation between the readers (r = 0.649-0.752) for all parameters apart from lesion conspicuity (r = 0.351). Both readers preferred the RS-EPI set of DWI images in most of the cases (reader 1: 0.87, 95% CI 0.74-0.99; reader 2: 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.93). Mean difference and limits of agreement between apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values obtained from the two methods were 0.01 (-0.08, 0.10) × 10(-3) mm(2)/s. CONCLUSIONS: RS-EPI DWI images showed improved image quality compared to SS-EPI technique at 3T. RS-EPI is a feasible technique in the pelvis for producing high-resolution DWI.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) of the pelvis at 3T is prone to artifacts that diminish the image quality. Readout-segmented echo-planar imaging (RS-EPI) is a new DWI technique that can reduce the artifacts associated with standard single-shot echo-planar imaging (SS-EPI) DWI. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and image quality of RS-EPI in pelvic DWI compared to SS-EPI on a 3T imaging system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty patients underwent pelvic DWI on a 3T scanner with SS-EPI and RS-EPI techniques. Two blinded readers independently assessed each set of images for geometric distortion, image blurring, ghosting artifacts, lesion conspicuity, and overall image quality on a 7-point scale. Qualitative image scores were compared using paired Wilcoxon signed rank test. Interreader correlation was assessed by Spearman rank correlation. RESULTS: Geometric distortion, imaging blurring, ghosting artifacts, lesion conspicuity, and overall image quality were rated significantly better by both readers for RS-EPI technique (P < .01 for all parameters). There was moderate-high correlation between the readers (r = 0.649-0.752) for all parameters apart from lesion conspicuity (r = 0.351). Both readers preferred the RS-EPI set of DWI images in most of the cases (reader 1: 0.87, 95% CI 0.74-0.99; reader 2: 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.93). Mean difference and limits of agreement between apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values obtained from the two methods were 0.01 (-0.08, 0.10) × 10(-3) mm(2)/s. CONCLUSIONS:RS-EPI DWI images showed improved image quality compared to SS-EPI technique at 3T. RS-EPI is a feasible technique in the pelvis for producing high-resolution DWI.
Authors: Andriy Fedorov; Kemal Tuncali; Lawrence P Panych; Janice Fairhurst; Elmira Hassanzadeh; Ravi T Seethamraju; Clare M Tempany; Stephan E Maier Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2016-05-27 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: I Friedli; L A Crowe; L Berchtold; S Moll; K Hadaya; T de Perrot; C Vesin; P-Y Martin; S de Seigneux; J-P Vallée Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2016-07-21 Impact factor: 4.379