Jessica M Winfield1, David J Collins1, Andrew N Priest2, Rebecca A Quest3, Alan Glover3, Sally Hunter2, Veronica A Morgan1, Susan Freeman2, Andrea Rockall3, Nandita M deSouza1. 1. MRI Unit, Royal Marsden Hospital, Downs Road, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PT, United Kingdom and Cancer Research UK Cancer Imaging Centre, Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, 123 Old Brompton Road, London SW7 3RP, United Kingdom. 2. Department of Radiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, United Kingdom. 3. Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Imaging Department, Hammersmith Hospital, Du Cane Road, London W12 0HS, United Kingdom.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To develop methods for optimization of diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) in the abdomen and pelvis on 1.5 T MR scanners from three manufacturers and assess repeatability of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) estimates in a temperature-controlled phantom and abdominal and pelvic organs in healthy volunteers. METHODS: Geometric distortion, ghosting, fat suppression, and repeatability and homogeneity of ADC estimates were assessed using phantoms and volunteers. Healthy volunteers (ten per scanner) were each scanned twice on the same scanner. One volunteer traveled to all three institutions in order to provide images for qualitative comparison. The common volunteer was excluded from quantitative analysis of the data from scanners 2 and 3 in order to ensure statistical independence, giving n = 10 on scanner 1 and n = 9 on scanners 2 and 3 for quantitative analysis. Repeatability and interscanner variation of ADC estimates in kidneys, liver, spleen, and uterus were assessed using within-patient coefficient of variation (wCV) and Kruskal-Wallis tests, respectively. RESULTS: The coefficient of variation of ADC estimates in the temperature-controlled phantom was 1%-4% for all scanners. Images of healthy volunteers from all scanners showed homogeneous fat suppression and no marked ghosting or geometric distortion. The wCV of ADC estimates was 2%-4% for kidneys, 3%-7% for liver, 6%-9% for spleen, and 7%-10% for uterus. ADC estimates in kidneys, spleen, and uterus showed no significant difference between scanners but a significant difference was observed in liver (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: DW-MRI protocols can be optimized using simple phantom measurements to produce good quality images in the abdomen and pelvis at 1.5 T with repeatable quantitative measurements in a multicenter study.
PURPOSE: To develop methods for optimization of diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) in the abdomen and pelvis on 1.5 T MR scanners from three manufacturers and assess repeatability of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) estimates in a temperature-controlled phantom and abdominal and pelvic organs in healthy volunteers. METHODS: Geometric distortion, ghosting, fat suppression, and repeatability and homogeneity of ADC estimates were assessed using phantoms and volunteers. Healthy volunteers (ten per scanner) were each scanned twice on the same scanner. One volunteer traveled to all three institutions in order to provide images for qualitative comparison. The common volunteer was excluded from quantitative analysis of the data from scanners 2 and 3 in order to ensure statistical independence, giving n = 10 on scanner 1 and n = 9 on scanners 2 and 3 for quantitative analysis. Repeatability and interscanner variation of ADC estimates in kidneys, liver, spleen, and uterus were assessed using within-patient coefficient of variation (wCV) and Kruskal-Wallis tests, respectively. RESULTS: The coefficient of variation of ADC estimates in the temperature-controlled phantom was 1%-4% for all scanners. Images of healthy volunteers from all scanners showed homogeneous fat suppression and no marked ghosting or geometric distortion. The wCV of ADC estimates was 2%-4% for kidneys, 3%-7% for liver, 6%-9% for spleen, and 7%-10% for uterus. ADC estimates in kidneys, spleen, and uterus showed no significant difference between scanners but a significant difference was observed in liver (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: DW-MRI protocols can be optimized using simple phantom measurements to produce good quality images in the abdomen and pelvis at 1.5 T with repeatable quantitative measurements in a multicenter study.
Authors: Jessica M Winfield; Nina Tunariu; Mihaela Rata; Keiko Miyazaki; Neil P Jerome; Michael Germuska; Matthew D Blackledge; David J Collins; Johann S de Bono; Timothy A Yap; Nandita M deSouza; Simon J Doran; Dow-Mu Koh; Martin O Leach; Christina Messiou; Matthew R Orton Journal: Radiology Date: 2017-03-16 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: N M deSouza; J M Winfield; J C Waterton; A Weller; M-V Papoutsaki; S J Doran; D J Collins; L Fournier; D Sullivan; T Chenevert; A Jackson; M Boss; S Trattnig; Y Liu Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-09-27 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Ryan Pathak; Hossein Ragheb; Neil A Thacker; David M Morris; Houshang Amiri; Joost Kuijer; Nandita M deSouza; Arend Heerschap; Alan Jackson Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-10-26 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Jessica M Winfield; Gabriele Poillucci; Matthew D Blackledge; David J Collins; Vallari Shah; Nina Tunariu; Martin F Kaiser; Christina Messiou Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 5.315