Jana Taron1, Petros Martirosian2, Nina F Schwenzer1, Michael Erb3, Thomas Kuestner4, Jakob Weiß1, Ahmed Othman1, Mike Notohamiprodjo1, Konstantin Nikolaou1, Christina Schraml5. 1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany. 2. Section on Experimental Radiology, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany. 3. Department of Biomedical Magnetic Resonance, University Hospital of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany. 4. Institute of Signal Processing and System Theory, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany. 5. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany. christina.schraml@med.uni-tuebingen.de.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate simultaneous multislice (sms) accelerated diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) of the liver in comparison to conventional sequences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten volunteers underwent DWI of the liver at 1.5 T. Four different sms-accelerated sequences with monopolar and bipolar gradient preparation (MP, BP) and acceleration factors 2 and 3 (sms2-DWI, sms3-DWI) were compared to conventional DWI (c-DWI). Image quality criteria rated on a 5-point Likert scale (5 = excellent), image quality sum scores (maximum 120), and ADC were compared using Friedman test and Dunn-Bonferroni post hoc test. Bland-Altman plots were calculated for ADC comparison. p values <0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: Sms2-DWI offered scan time minimization of 67 % without significant difference in image quality (sum score: sms2-DWI MP/BP: 97 ± 8/92 ± 9; c-DWI MP/BP: 99 ± 8/97 ± 8). Sms3-DWI offered slight additional scan time minimization with significantly inferior image quality (sum score: sms3-DWI MP/BP: 75 ± 14/69 ± 14; p < 0.001). MP preparation provided slightly higher image quality in sms-DWI without statistical significance. ADC in sms-DWI were significantly lower (sms2-DWI MP 1.01 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s; c-DWI MP 1.20 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Sms2-DWI provides considerable scan time minimization without significant shortcomings in image quality. Sms3-DWI provides significantly inferior image quality without further scan time minimization. Potentially lower ADC in sms-DWI should be considered in clinical routine.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate simultaneous multislice (sms) accelerated diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) of the liver in comparison to conventional sequences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten volunteers underwent DWI of the liver at 1.5 T. Four different sms-accelerated sequences with monopolar and bipolar gradient preparation (MP, BP) and acceleration factors 2 and 3 (sms2-DWI, sms3-DWI) were compared to conventional DWI (c-DWI). Image quality criteria rated on a 5-point Likert scale (5 = excellent), image quality sum scores (maximum 120), and ADC were compared using Friedman test and Dunn-Bonferroni post hoc test. Bland-Altman plots were calculated for ADC comparison. p values <0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS:Sms2-DWI offered scan time minimization of 67 % without significant difference in image quality (sum score: sms2-DWI MP/BP: 97 ± 8/92 ± 9; c-DWI MP/BP: 99 ± 8/97 ± 8). Sms3-DWI offered slight additional scan time minimization with significantly inferior image quality (sum score: sms3-DWI MP/BP: 75 ± 14/69 ± 14; p < 0.001). MP preparation provided slightly higher image quality in sms-DWI without statistical significance. ADC in sms-DWI were significantly lower (sms2-DWI MP 1.01 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s; c-DWI MP 1.20 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION:Sms2-DWI provides considerable scan time minimization without significant shortcomings in image quality. Sms3-DWI provides significantly inferior image quality without further scan time minimization. Potentially lower ADC in sms-DWI should be considered in clinical routine.
Authors: João Pedro Filipe; Luís Curvo-Semedo; João Casalta-Lopes; Maria Cristina Marques; Filipe Caseiro-Alves Journal: MAGMA Date: 2012-10-06 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Steen Moeller; Essa Yacoub; Cheryl A Olman; Edward Auerbach; John Strupp; Noam Harel; Kâmil Uğurbil Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Christian Geppert; Michael Kiritsy; Thorsten Feiweier; David J Mossa; Hersh Chandarana Journal: Abdom Imaging Date: 2015-02
Authors: Hadrien A Dyvorne; Nicola Galea; Thomas Nevers; M Isabel Fiel; David Carpenter; Edmund Wong; Matthew Orton; Andre de Oliveira; Thorsten Feiweier; Marie-Louise Vachon; James S Babb; Bachir Taouli Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-12-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Angus Z Lau; Elizabeth M Tunnicliffe; Robert Frost; Peter J Koopmans; Damian J Tyler; Matthew D Robson Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2014-03-21 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Tristan C F van Heijst; Bram van Asselen; Ruud M Pijnappel; Marissa Cloos-van Balen; Jan J W Lagendijk; Desirée van den Bongard; Mariëlle E P Philippens Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2016-05-10 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Jana Taron; Christina Schraml; Christina Pfannenberg; Matthias Reimold; Nina Schwenzer; Konstantin Nikolaou; Petros Martirosian; Ferdinand Seith Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-02-26 Impact factor: 5.315