OBJECTIVE: Volume isotropic simultaneous interleaved bright- and black-blood examination (VISIBLE) is a recently developed 3D MR sequence that provides simultaneous acquisitions of images with blood vessel suppression (Black) and images without it (Bright). Our purpose was to evaluate the usefulness of VISIBLE in detecting brain metastases. METHODS: This prospective study included patients with suspected brain metastasis imaged with both VISIBLE and MPRAGE. From a data set, we compared the number of visualized blood vessels and the lesion-to-normal contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in 60 patients. We also performed an observer test to compare their diagnostic performance with VISIBLE, MPRAGE and only Black in 34 patients. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using a figure of merit (FOM), sensitivity, false-positive results per case (FPs/case) and reading time. RESULTS: The number of vessels was significantly fewer in Black compared to MPRAGE and Bright (P < 0.0001). CNR was significantly higher with both Black and Bright than with MPRAGE (P < 0.005). In the observer test, significantly higher sensitivity (P < 0.0001) and FOM (P < 0.0001), significantly shorter reading time (P = 0.0001) and similar FPs/case were achieved with VISIBLE compared to MPRAGE. Compared to only Black, VISIBLE resulted in comparable sensitivity, but significantly fewer FPs/case (P = 0.0008). CONCLUSION: VISIBLE can improve radiologists' diagnostic performance for brain metastasis. KEY POINTS: • VISIBLE can achieve higher sensitivity and shorter reading time than MPRAGE. • VISIBLE can achieve lower false-positive rates than blood vessel suppressed images. • Compared to MPRAGE, VISIBLE can improve diagnostic performance for brain metastasis.
OBJECTIVE: Volume isotropic simultaneous interleaved bright- and black-blood examination (VISIBLE) is a recently developed 3D MR sequence that provides simultaneous acquisitions of images with blood vessel suppression (Black) and images without it (Bright). Our purpose was to evaluate the usefulness of VISIBLE in detecting brain metastases. METHODS: This prospective study included patients with suspected brain metastasis imaged with both VISIBLE and MPRAGE. From a data set, we compared the number of visualized blood vessels and the lesion-to-normal contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in 60 patients. We also performed an observer test to compare their diagnostic performance with VISIBLE, MPRAGE and only Black in 34 patients. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using a figure of merit (FOM), sensitivity, false-positive results per case (FPs/case) and reading time. RESULTS: The number of vessels was significantly fewer in Black compared to MPRAGE and Bright (P < 0.0001). CNR was significantly higher with both Black and Bright than with MPRAGE (P < 0.005). In the observer test, significantly higher sensitivity (P < 0.0001) and FOM (P < 0.0001), significantly shorter reading time (P = 0.0001) and similar FPs/case were achieved with VISIBLE compared to MPRAGE. Compared to only Black, VISIBLE resulted in comparable sensitivity, but significantly fewer FPs/case (P = 0.0008). CONCLUSION: VISIBLE can improve radiologists' diagnostic performance for brain metastasis. KEY POINTS: • VISIBLE can achieve higher sensitivity and shorter reading time than MPRAGE. • VISIBLE can achieve lower false-positive rates than blood vessel suppressed images. • Compared to MPRAGE, VISIBLE can improve diagnostic performance for brain metastasis.
Authors: Li Dong; Jinnan Wang; Vasily L Yarnykh; Hunter R Underhill; Moni B Neradilek; Nayak Polissar; Thomas S Hatsukami; Chun Yuan Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Edward A Monaco; Amir H Faraji; Oren Berkowitz; Phillip V Parry; Uri Hadelsberg; Hideyuki Kano; Ajay Niranjan; Douglas Kondziolka; L Dade Lunsford Journal: Cancer Date: 2012-06-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: E Nagao; T Yoshiura; A Hiwatashi; M Obara; K Yamashita; H Kamano; Y Takayama; K Kobayashi; H Honda Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-02-03 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Bodo Lippitz; Christer Lindquist; Ian Paddick; David Peterson; Kevin O'Neill; Ronald Beaney Journal: Cancer Treat Rev Date: 2013-06-27 Impact factor: 12.111
Authors: Mark E Linskey; David W Andrews; Anthony L Asher; Stuart H Burri; Douglas Kondziolka; Paula D Robinson; Mario Ammirati; Charles S Cobbs; Laurie E Gaspar; Jay S Loeffler; Michael McDermott; Minesh P Mehta; Tom Mikkelsen; Jeffrey J Olson; Nina A Paleologos; Roy A Patchell; Timothy C Ryken; Steven N Kalkanis Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2009-12-04 Impact factor: 4.130