Gil-Sun Hong1, Choong Wook Lee2, Mi-Hyun Kim1, Seung Won Jang1, Sae Rom Chung1, Ga Young Yoon1, Jeong Kon Kim1. 1. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 138-736, Korea. 2. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 138-736, Korea. cwlee@amc.seoul.kr.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to assess the value of diffusion-weighted imaging with reverse phase-encoding polarity (R-DWI) in addition to conventional DWI using forward phase-encoding polarity (F-DWI) in differentiating acute brainstem infarctions from hyperintense artefacts. METHODS: Seventy-six patients with 38 hyperintense brainstem artefacts and 38 acute brainstem infarctions that had undergone F-DWI and R-DWI were retrospectively selected based on the clinicoradiological diagnosis. Four radiologists independently rated their confidence in diagnosing acute infarctions and ruling out brainstem artefacts in a blind manner, and then compared the diagnostic performance and confidence between F-DWI alone and F-DWI with R-DWI. RESULTS: The areas under the curve determined for F-DWI with R-DWI in diagnosing infarctions were significantly higher than F-DWI alone for all readers (resident 1, 0.908 vs 0.776; resident 2, 0.908 vs 0.789; neuroradiologist, 0.961 vs 0.868; emergency radiologist, 0.934 vs 0.855, all p < 0.05). All readers were more confident using F-DWI with R-DWI than F-DWI alone (all p < 0.05) for diagnosing acute brainstem infarction, and three readers (readers except the neuroradiologist) were more confident using F-DWI with R-DWI for ruling out brainstem artefacts (p ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSION: The addition of R-DWI to F-DWI is a valuable method for differentiating acute brainstem infarctions from hyperintense artefacts. KEY POINTS: • Hyperintense brainstem artefacts can be confused with acute infarctions on DWI. • Additional R-DWI to F-DWI reduces inter-reader variability in diagnosing brainstem infarctions. • Additional R-DWI improves performance and confidence for discriminating infarctions from artefacts.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to assess the value of diffusion-weighted imaging with reverse phase-encoding polarity (R-DWI) in addition to conventional DWI using forward phase-encoding polarity (F-DWI) in differentiating acute brainstem infarctions from hyperintense artefacts. METHODS: Seventy-six patients with 38 hyperintense brainstem artefacts and 38 acute brainstem infarctions that had undergone F-DWI and R-DWI were retrospectively selected based on the clinicoradiological diagnosis. Four radiologists independently rated their confidence in diagnosing acute infarctions and ruling out brainstem artefacts in a blind manner, and then compared the diagnostic performance and confidence between F-DWI alone and F-DWI with R-DWI. RESULTS: The areas under the curve determined for F-DWI with R-DWI in diagnosing infarctions were significantly higher than F-DWI alone for all readers (resident 1, 0.908 vs 0.776; resident 2, 0.908 vs 0.789; neuroradiologist, 0.961 vs 0.868; emergency radiologist, 0.934 vs 0.855, all p < 0.05). All readers were more confident using F-DWI with R-DWI than F-DWI alone (all p < 0.05) for diagnosing acute brainstem infarction, and three readers (readers except the neuroradiologist) were more confident using F-DWI with R-DWI for ruling out brainstem artefacts (p ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSION: The addition of R-DWI to F-DWI is a valuable method for differentiating acute brainstem infarctions from hyperintense artefacts. KEY POINTS: • Hyperintense brainstem artefacts can be confused with acute infarctions on DWI. • Additional R-DWI to F-DWI reduces inter-reader variability in diagnosing brainstem infarctions. • Additional R-DWI improves performance and confidence for discriminating infarctions from artefacts.
Authors: R Bammer; S L Keeling; M Augustin; K P Pruessmann; R Wolf; R Stollberger; H P Hartung; F Fazekas Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Stefan Skare; Rexford D Newbould; David B Clayton; Gregory W Albers; Scott Nagle; Roland Bammer Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Kristen W Yeom; Samantha J Holdsworth; Anh T Van; Michael Iv; Stefan Skare; Robert M Lober; Roland Bammer Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Michael H Schönfeld; Robert M Ritzel; Andre Kemmling; Marielle Ernst; Jens Fiehler; Susanne Gellißen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-07-03 Impact factor: 3.240