Sangmin Lee1, Dae Seob Choi2, Hwa Seon Shin1, Hye Jin Baek1, Ho Cheol Choi1, Sung Eun Park1. 1. Department of Radiology, Gyeongsang National University School of Medicine, Jinju, Republic of Korea. 2. Gyeongsang Institute of Health Science (D.S.C.), Gyeongsang National University School of Medicine, Jinju, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Fat suppression magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technique has been used to improve the diagnostic confidence in lumbar spine diseases. We aimed to compare T2-weighted water-fat separation technique (T2 Dixon) with spectral attenuated inversion recovery (SPAIR) image for fat suppression. METHODS: Lumbar spine MRI examinations were performed in 79 patients by using a 3.0 T machine. We compared T2 Dixon water-only image and SPAIR image for the evaluation of fat suppression quality and lesion conspicuity. For qualitative evaluation, two radiologists scored the images from Dixon and SPAIR for fat suppression uniformity and lesion conspicuity. Quantitative assessment was also performed for 39 lesions in 26 patients who had lesions in their spine bodies. Contrast ratio (CR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated by signal intensity measurement of the lesions, adjacent bodies, and background noise. The Wilcoxon's signed-rank test and paired sample t-test were used to assess the statistical significance of qualitative and quantitative data, respectively. RESULTS: For qualitative assessment, T2 Dixon water-only image showed higher mean scores for fat suppression quality and lesion conspicuity than SPAIR (2.99±0.11 vs. 2.18±0.38 and 2.84±0.37 vs. 2.28±0.51, respectively). For quantitative measurement, the CR and CNR values of the lesions were higher on T2 Dixon than on SPAIR. Both qualitative and quantitative results showed statistically significant differences between T2 Dixon and SPAIR (P < 0.01 in all). CONCLUSION: T2 Dixon sequence was superior to SPAIR for the quality of fat suppression and for the delineation of lumbar spine lesions.
PURPOSE: Fat suppression magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technique has been used to improve the diagnostic confidence in lumbar spine diseases. We aimed to compare T2-weighted water-fat separation technique (T2 Dixon) with spectral attenuated inversion recovery (SPAIR) image for fat suppression. METHODS: Lumbar spine MRI examinations were performed in 79 patients by using a 3.0 T machine. We compared T2 Dixon water-only image and SPAIR image for the evaluation of fat suppression quality and lesion conspicuity. For qualitative evaluation, two radiologists scored the images from Dixon and SPAIR for fat suppression uniformity and lesion conspicuity. Quantitative assessment was also performed for 39 lesions in 26 patients who had lesions in their spine bodies. Contrast ratio (CR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated by signal intensity measurement of the lesions, adjacent bodies, and background noise. The Wilcoxon's signed-rank test and paired sample t-test were used to assess the statistical significance of qualitative and quantitative data, respectively. RESULTS: For qualitative assessment, T2 Dixon water-only image showed higher mean scores for fat suppression quality and lesion conspicuity than SPAIR (2.99±0.11 vs. 2.18±0.38 and 2.84±0.37 vs. 2.28±0.51, respectively). For quantitative measurement, the CR and CNR values of the lesions were higher on T2 Dixon than on SPAIR. Both qualitative and quantitative results showed statistically significant differences between T2 Dixon and SPAIR (P < 0.01 in all). CONCLUSION: T2 Dixon sequence was superior to SPAIR for the quality of fat suppression and for the delineation of lumbar spine lesions.
Authors: Jingfei Ma; Jong Bum Son; James A Bankson; R Jason Stafford; Haesun Choi; Dustin Ragan Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2005-11-28 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Thorsten A Bley; Oliver Wieben; Christopher J François; Jean H Brittain; Scott B Reeder Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: K M Jones; R B Schwartz; M T Mantello; S S Ahn; R Khorasani; S Mukherji; K Oshio; R V Mulkern Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1994-03 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Filippo Del Grande; Francesco Santini; Daniel A Herzka; Michael R Aro; Cooper W Dean; Garry E Gold; John A Carrino Journal: Radiographics Date: 2014 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: S Brandão; D Seixas; M Ayres-Basto; S Castro; J Neto; C Martins; J C Ferreira; F Parada Journal: Clin Radiol Date: 2013-08-06 Impact factor: 2.350
Authors: Insa Janssen; Nico Sollmann; Melanie Barz; Thomas Baum; Karl Schaller; Claus Zimmer; Yu-Mi Ryang; Jan S Kirschke; Bernhard Meyer Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2021-03-05