OBJECTIVES: To compare the three-dimensional (3D)-fast spin-echo (FSE)-Cube with a conventional imaging protocol in evaluation of dacryostenosis. METHODS: Thirty-three patients with epiphora underwent examinations using Cube magnetic resonance dacryocystography (MRD) and a conventional protocol, which included 3D fast-recovery fast spin-echo (FRFSE) MRD and two-dimensional (2D)-FSE sequences at 3.0 T. Using lachrymal endoscopic findings as the reference standard, we calculated the sensitivity and specificity of both protocols for detecting lachrymal drainage system (LDS) obstruction and their accuracies in depicting the level of obstruction. Comparable coronal and axial images were selected for bot sequences. Two neuroradiologists graded paired images for blurring, artefacts, anatomic details, and overall image quality. RESULTS: The two methods showed no significant difference in sensitivity (89.5 % vs. 94.7 %; p =0.674), specificity (64.3 %; p =1) or accuracy (86.8 %; p =1) in detecting or depicting LDS obstruction. Blurring and artefacts were significantly better on 2D-FSE images (p <0.01 and p <0.05, respectively). Anatomic details were significantly better on Cube reformats (p <0.001). No significant difference existed in overall image quality (p >0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with the conventional protocol, Cube MRD demonstrates satisfactory image quality and similar diagnostic capability for cases of possible LDS disease.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the three-dimensional (3D)-fast spin-echo (FSE)-Cube with a conventional imaging protocol in evaluation of dacryostenosis. METHODS: Thirty-three patients with epiphora underwent examinations using Cube magnetic resonance dacryocystography (MRD) and a conventional protocol, which included 3D fast-recovery fast spin-echo (FRFSE) MRD and two-dimensional (2D)-FSE sequences at 3.0 T. Using lachrymal endoscopic findings as the reference standard, we calculated the sensitivity and specificity of both protocols for detecting lachrymal drainage system (LDS) obstruction and their accuracies in depicting the level of obstruction. Comparable coronal and axial images were selected for bot sequences. Two neuroradiologists graded paired images for blurring, artefacts, anatomic details, and overall image quality. RESULTS: The two methods showed no significant difference in sensitivity (89.5 % vs. 94.7 %; p =0.674), specificity (64.3 %; p =1) or accuracy (86.8 %; p =1) in detecting or depicting LDS obstruction. Blurring and artefacts were significantly better on 2D-FSE images (p <0.01 and p <0.05, respectively). Anatomic details were significantly better on Cube reformats (p <0.001). No significant difference existed in overall image quality (p >0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with the conventional protocol, Cube MRD demonstrates satisfactory image quality and similar diagnostic capability for cases of possible LDS disease.
Authors: Garima Agrawal; Jody M Riherd; Reed F Busse; J Louis Hinshaw; Elizabeth A Sadowski Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: A Tagliafico; G Succio; C E Neumaier; G Baio; G Serafini; M Ghidara; M Calabrese; C Martinoli Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2011-02-22 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Richard Kijowski; Kirkland W Davis; Michael A Woods; Mary J Lindstrom; Arthur A De Smet; Garry E Gold; Reed F Busse Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Reed F Busse; Anja C S Brau; Anthony Vu; Charles R Michelich; Ersin Bayram; Richard Kijowski; Scott B Reeder; Howard A Rowley Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 4.668