Xinzeng Wang1, Ali Pirasteh1, James Brugarolas2,3, Neil M Rofsky1,4, Robert E Lenkinski1,4, Ivan Pedrosa1,2,4, Ananth J Madhuranthakam1,4. 1. Department of Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. 2. Kidney Cancer Program, Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. 4. Advanced Imaging Research Center, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To develop a whole-body MRI technique at 3T with improved lesion conspicuity for metastatic cancer detection using fast, high-resolution and high SNR T2 -weighted (T2 W) imaging with simultaneous fat and fluid suppression. THEORY AND METHODS: The proposed dual-echo T2 -weighted acquisition for enhanced conspicuity of tumors (DETECT) acquires 4 images, in-phase (IP) and out-of-phase (OP) at a short and a long TE using single-shot turbo spin echo. The IP/OP images at the short and long TEs are reconstructed using the standard Dixon and shared-field-map Dixon reconstruction respectively, for robust fat-water separation. An adaptive complex subtraction between the 2 TE water-only images achieves fluid attenuation. DETECT imaging was optimized and evaluated in whole-body imaging of 5 healthy volunteers, and compared against diffusion-weighted imaging with background suppression (DWIBS) in 5 patients with known metastatic renal cell carcinoma. RESULTS: Robust fat-water separation and fluid attenuation were achieved using the shared-field-map Dixon reconstruction and adaptive complex subtraction, respectively. DETECT imaging technique generated co-registered T2 W images with and without fat suppression, heavily T2 W, and fat and fluid suppressed T2 W whole-body images in <7 min. Compared to DWIBS acquired in 17 min, the DETECT imaging achieved better detection and localization of lesions in patients with metastatic cancer. CONCLUSION: DETECT imaging technique generates T2 W images with high resolution, high SNR, minimal geometric distortions, and provides good lesion conspicuity with robust fat and fluid suppression in <7 min for whole-body imaging, demonstrating efficient and reliable metastatic cancer detection at 3T.
PURPOSE: To develop a whole-body MRI technique at 3T with improved lesion conspicuity for metastatic cancer detection using fast, high-resolution and high SNR T2 -weighted (T2 W) imaging with simultaneous fat and fluid suppression. THEORY AND METHODS: The proposed dual-echo T2 -weighted acquisition for enhanced conspicuity of tumors (DETECT) acquires 4 images, in-phase (IP) and out-of-phase (OP) at a short and a long TE using single-shot turbo spin echo. The IP/OP images at the short and long TEs are reconstructed using the standard Dixon and shared-field-map Dixon reconstruction respectively, for robust fat-water separation. An adaptive complex subtraction between the 2 TEwater-only images achieves fluid attenuation. DETECT imaging was optimized and evaluated in whole-body imaging of 5 healthy volunteers, and compared against diffusion-weighted imaging with background suppression (DWIBS) in 5 patients with known metastatic renal cell carcinoma. RESULTS: Robust fat-water separation and fluid attenuation were achieved using the shared-field-map Dixon reconstruction and adaptive complex subtraction, respectively. DETECT imaging technique generated co-registered T2 W images with and without fat suppression, heavily T2 W, and fat and fluid suppressed T2 W whole-body images in <7 min. Compared to DWIBS acquired in 17 min, the DETECT imaging achieved better detection and localization of lesions in patients with metastatic cancer. CONCLUSION: DETECT imaging technique generates T2 W images with high resolution, high SNR, minimal geometric distortions, and provides good lesion conspicuity with robust fat and fluid suppression in <7 min for whole-body imaging, demonstrating efficient and reliable metastatic cancer detection at 3T.
Authors: Thomas C Kwee; Taro Takahara; Reiji Ochiai; Kazuhiro Katahira; Marc Van Cauteren; Yutaka Imai; Rutger A J Nievelstein; Peter R Luijten Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2009-04-28 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Subhendra N Sarkar; David C Alsop; Ananth J Madhuranthakam; Reed F Busse; Philip M Robson; Neil M Rofsky; David B Hackney Journal: Radiology Date: 2011-02-25 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Dow-Mu Koh; Matthew Blackledge; Anwar R Padhani; Taro Takahara; Thomas C Kwee; Martin O Leach; David J Collins Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Andreas M Loening; Manojkumar Saranathan; Nichanan Ruangwattanapaisarn; Daniel V Litwiller; Ann Shimakawa; Shreyas S Vasanawala Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2015-06-19 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Shonit Punwani; Stuart A Taylor; Alan Bainbridge; Vineet Prakash; Steven Bandula; Enrico De Vita; Oystein E Olsen; Sharon F Hain; Nicola Stevens; Stephen Daw; Ananth Shankar; Jamshed B Bomanji; Paul D Humphries Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: R Walker; P Kessar; R Blanchard; M Dimasi; K Harper; V DeCarvalho; E K Yucel; L Patriquin; S Eustace Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Ali Pirasteh; Christopher Riedl; Marius Erik Mayerhoefer; Romina Grazia Giancipoli; Steven Mark Larson; Lisa Bodei Journal: Clin Transl Imaging Date: 2019-09-20
Authors: Damiano Caruso; Marta Zerunian; Domenico De Santis; Tommaso Biondi; Pasquale Paolantonio; Marco Rengo; Davide Bellini; Riccardo Ferrari; Maria Ciolina; Elena Lucertini; Michela Polici; Elsa Iannicelli; Vincenzo Tombolini; Andrea Laghi Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2020-10-10 Impact factor: 3.411