A Lindenholz1, A A Harteveld2, J J M Zwanenburg2, J C W Siero2,3, J Hendrikse2. 1. From the Department of Radiology (A.L., A.A.H., J.J.M.Z., J.C.W.S., J.H.) University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands A.Lindenholz@umcutrecht.nl. 2. From the Department of Radiology (A.L., A.A.H., J.J.M.Z., J.C.W.S., J.H.) University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands. 3. Spinoza Center for Neuroimaging (J.C.W.S.), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Intracranial vessel wall MR imaging plays an increasing role in diagnosing intracranial vascular diseases. For a complete assessment, pre- and postcontrast sequences are required, and including other sequences, these result in a long scan duration. Ideally, the scan time of the vessel wall sequence should be reduced. The purpose of this study was to evaluate different intracranial vessel wall sequence variants to reduce scan duration, provided an acceptable image quality can be maintained. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Starting from the vessel wall sequence that we use clinically (6:42 minutes), 6 scan variants were tested (scan duration ranging between 4:39 and 8:24 minutes), creating various trade-offs among spatial resolution, SNR, and contrast-to-noise ratio. In total, 15 subjects were scanned on a 3T MR imaging scanner: In 5 subjects, all 7 variants were performed precontrast-only, and in 10 other subjects, the fastest variant (4:39 minutes) and our clinically used variant (6:42 minutes) were performed pre- and postcontrast. RESULTS: The fastest variant (4:39 minutes) had higher or comparable SNRs/contrast-to-noise ratios of the intracranial vessel walls compared with the reference sequence (6:42 minutes). Qualitative assessment showed that the contrast-to-noise ratio was most suppressed in the fastest variant of 4:39 minutes and the variant of 6:42 minutes pre- and postcontrast. SNRs/contrast-to-noise ratios of the fastest variant were all, except one, higher compared with the variant of 6:42 minutes (P < .008). Furthermore, the fastest variant (4:39 minutes) detected all vessel wall lesions identified on the 6:42-minute variant. CONCLUSIONS: A 30% faster vessel wall sequence was developed with high SNRs/contrast-to-noise ratios that resulted in good visibility of the intracranial vessel wall.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Intracranial vessel wall MR imaging plays an increasing role in diagnosing intracranial vascular diseases. For a complete assessment, pre- and postcontrast sequences are required, and including other sequences, these result in a long scan duration. Ideally, the scan time of the vessel wall sequence should be reduced. The purpose of this study was to evaluate different intracranial vessel wall sequence variants to reduce scan duration, provided an acceptable image quality can be maintained. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Starting from the vessel wall sequence that we use clinically (6:42 minutes), 6 scan variants were tested (scan duration ranging between 4:39 and 8:24 minutes), creating various trade-offs among spatial resolution, SNR, and contrast-to-noise ratio. In total, 15 subjects were scanned on a 3T MR imaging scanner: In 5 subjects, all 7 variants were performed precontrast-only, and in 10 other subjects, the fastest variant (4:39 minutes) and our clinically used variant (6:42 minutes) were performed pre- and postcontrast. RESULTS: The fastest variant (4:39 minutes) had higher or comparable SNRs/contrast-to-noise ratios of the intracranial vessel walls compared with the reference sequence (6:42 minutes). Qualitative assessment showed that the contrast-to-noise ratio was most suppressed in the fastest variant of 4:39 minutes and the variant of 6:42 minutes pre- and postcontrast. SNRs/contrast-to-noise ratios of the fastest variant were all, except one, higher compared with the variant of 6:42 minutes (P < .008). Furthermore, the fastest variant (4:39 minutes) detected all vessel wall lesions identified on the 6:42-minute variant. CONCLUSIONS: A 30% faster vessel wall sequence was developed with high SNRs/contrast-to-noise ratios that resulted in good visibility of the intracranial vessel wall.
Authors: Florian Wiesinger; Pierre-Francois Van de Moortele; Gregor Adriany; Nicola De Zanche; Kamil Ugurbil; Klaas P Pruessmann Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Ye Qiao; David A Steinman; Qin Qin; Maryam Etesami; Michael Schär; Brad C Astor; Bruce A Wasserman Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Nikki Dieleman; Anja G van der Kolk; Jaco J M Zwanenburg; Anita A Harteveld; Geert J Biessels; Peter R Luijten; Jeroen Hendrikse Journal: Circulation Date: 2014-07-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Nikki Dieleman; Anja G van der Kolk; Susanne J van Veluw; Catharina J M Frijns; Anita A Harteveld; Peter R Luijten; Jeroen Hendrikse Journal: Neurology Date: 2014-09-03 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: R H Swartz; S S Bhuta; R I Farb; R Agid; R A Willinsky; K G Terbrugge; J Butany; B A Wasserman; D M Johnstone; F L Silver; D J Mikulis Journal: Neurology Date: 2009-02-17 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: E C Obusez; F Hui; R A Hajj-Ali; R Cerejo; L H Calabrese; T Hammad; S E Jones Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-04-10 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Nikki Dieleman; Wenjie Yang; Jill M Abrigo; Winnie Chiu Wing Chu; Anja G van der Kolk; Jeroen C W Siero; Ka Sing Wong; Jeroen Hendrikse; Xiang Yan Chen Journal: Stroke Date: 2016-06-14 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Jae W Song; Brianna F Moon; Morgan P Burke; Srikant Kamesh Iyer; Mark A Elliott; Haochang Shou; Steven R Messé; Scott E Kasner; Laurie A Loevner; Mitchell D Schnall; John E Kirsch; Walter R Witschey; Zhaoyang Fan Journal: J Neuroimaging Date: 2020-05-11 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Maximilian Patzig; Robert Forbrig; Clemens Küpper; Ozan Eren; Tobias Saam; Lars Kellert; Thomas Liebig; Florian Schöberl Journal: J Neurol Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 4.849