Yasunari Fujinaga1, Yoshihiro Kitou2, Ayumi Ohya3, Yasuo Adachi2, Naomichi Tamaru2, Aya Shiobara2, Hitoshi Ueda2, Marcel D Nickel4, Katsuya Maruyama5, Masumi Kadoya3. 1. Department of Radiology, Shinshu University School of Medicine, 3-1-1 Asahi, Matsumoto, 390-8621, Japan. fujinaga@shinshu-u.ac.jp. 2. Radiology Division, Shinshu University Hospital, 3-1-1 Asahi, Matsumoto, 390-8621, Japan. 3. Department of Radiology, Shinshu University School of Medicine, 3-1-1 Asahi, Matsumoto, 390-8621, Japan. 4. Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Erlangen, Germany. 5. Imaging & Therapy Systems Division, Siemens Japan. K. K., Shinagawa, Tokyo, Japan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the superiority of radial volumetric breath-hold examination (r-VIBE) with k-space weighted image contrast reconstruction (KWIC) over Cartesian VIBE (c-VIBE) for reducing motion artefacts. METHODS: We acquired r-VIBE-KWIC and c-VIBE images in 10 healthy volunteers. Each acquisition lasted 24 seconds. The volunteers held their breath for decreasing lengths of time during the acquisitions, from 24 to 0 seconds (protocols A-E). Magnetic resonance images at the level of the right portal vein and confluence of hepatic veins were assessed by two readers using a five-point scale with a higher number indicating a better study. RESULTS: The mean scores for the complete r-VIBE-KWIC series (r-VIBEfull) and first r-VIBE-KWIC series (r-VIBE1) were not significantly lower than those for c-VIBE in any protocols. The mean scores for c-VIBE were lower than those for r-VIBEfull and r-VIBE1 in protocols C and D. The mean score for c-VIBE was lower than that for r-VIBEfull in protocol E. The mean score for the eighth r-VIBE-KWIC series (r-VIBE8) was lower than that for c-VIBE only in protocol B. CONCLUSION: r-VIBE-KWIC minimised artefacts relative to c-VIBE at any slice location. The r-VIBE-KWIC's sub-frame images during the breath-holding period were hardly affected by another failed breath-holding period. KEY POINTS: • A two-reader study revealed r-VIBE-KWIC's advantages over c-VIBE • The image quality of r-VIBE-KWIC's sub-frame images was maintained during breath holding • Full-frame r-VIBE-KWIC images minimized motion artefacts caused by breathing • A complete breath holding over half the acquisition time is recommended for c-VIBE • c-VIBE was susceptible to respiratory motion especially in the subphrenic region.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the superiority of radial volumetric breath-hold examination (r-VIBE) with k-space weighted image contrast reconstruction (KWIC) over Cartesian VIBE (c-VIBE) for reducing motion artefacts. METHODS: We acquired r-VIBE-KWIC and c-VIBE images in 10 healthy volunteers. Each acquisition lasted 24 seconds. The volunteers held their breath for decreasing lengths of time during the acquisitions, from 24 to 0 seconds (protocols A-E). Magnetic resonance images at the level of the right portal vein and confluence of hepatic veins were assessed by two readers using a five-point scale with a higher number indicating a better study. RESULTS: The mean scores for the complete r-VIBE-KWIC series (r-VIBEfull) and first r-VIBE-KWIC series (r-VIBE1) were not significantly lower than those for c-VIBE in any protocols. The mean scores for c-VIBE were lower than those for r-VIBEfull and r-VIBE1 in protocols C and D. The mean score for c-VIBE was lower than that for r-VIBEfull in protocol E. The mean score for the eighth r-VIBE-KWIC series (r-VIBE8) was lower than that for c-VIBE only in protocol B. CONCLUSION: r-VIBE-KWIC minimised artefacts relative to c-VIBE at any slice location. The r-VIBE-KWIC's sub-frame images during the breath-holding period were hardly affected by another failed breath-holding period. KEY POINTS: • A two-reader study revealed r-VIBE-KWIC's advantages over c-VIBE • The image quality of r-VIBE-KWIC's sub-frame images was maintained during breath holding • Full-frame r-VIBE-KWIC images minimized motion artefacts caused by breathing • A complete breath holding over half the acquisition time is recommended for c-VIBE • c-VIBE was susceptible to respiratory motion especially in the subphrenic region.
Authors: Hersh Chandarana; Tobias K Block; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Ruth P Lim; Danny Kim; David J Mossa; James S Babb; Berthold Kiefer; Vivian S Lee Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Saraporn Bamrungchart; Engy M Tantaway; Esin C Midia; Mateus A Hernandes; Saowanee Srirattanapong; Brian M Dale; Richard C Semelka Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2013-02-15 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Matthew S Davenport; Mustafa R Bashir; Jason A Pietryga; Joseph T Weber; Shokoufeh Khalatbari; Hero K Hussain Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2014-07-23 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Hersh Chandarana; Kai T Block; Matthew J Winfeld; Shailee V Lala; Daniel Mazori; Emalyn Giuffrida; James S Babb; Sarah S Milla Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-09-25 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Matthew S Davenport; Benjamin L Viglianti; Mahmoud M Al-Hawary; Elaine M Caoili; Ravi K Kaza; Peter S C Liu; Katherine E Maturen; Thomas L Chenevert; Hero K Hussain Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-11-28 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jakob Weiss; Jana Taron; Ahmed E Othman; Robert Grimm; Matthias Kuendel; Petros Martirosian; Christer Ruff; Christina Schraml; Konstantin Nikolaou; Mike Notohamiprodjo Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-06-08 Impact factor: 5.315