Takahiro Ueda1, Yoshiharu Ohno2, Kaori Yamamoto3, Akiyoshi Iwase4, Takashi Fukuba5, Satomu Hanamatsu6, Yuki Obama7, Hirotaka Ikeda8, Masato Ikedo9, Masao Yui10, Kazuhiro Murayama11, Hiroshi Toyama12. 1. Department of Radiology, Fujita Health University, School of Medicine, 1-98, Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho, Toyoake, Aichi, 470-1192, Japan. Electronic address: t-ueda@fujita-hu.ac.jp. 2. Department of Radiology, Fujita Health University, School of Medicine, 1-98, Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho, Toyoake, Aichi, 470-1192, Japan; Joint Research Laboratory of Advanced Medical Imaging, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, 1-98, Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho, Toyoake, Aichi, 470-1192, Japan. Electronic address: yohno@fujita-hu.ac.jp. 3. Canon Medical Systems Corporation, 1385, Shimoishigami, Otawara, Tochigi, 324-0036, Japan. Electronic address: kaori4.yamamoto@medical.canon. 4. Department of Radiology, Fujita Health University Hospital, 1-98, Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho, Toyoake, Aichi, 470-1192, Japan. Electronic address: mrrider@fujita-hu.ac.jp. 5. Department of Radiology, Fujita Health University Hospital, 1-98, Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho, Toyoake, Aichi, 470-1192, Japan. Electronic address: fuku@fujita-hu.ac.jp. 6. Department of Radiology, Fujita Health University, School of Medicine, 1-98, Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho, Toyoake, Aichi, 470-1192, Japan. Electronic address: shana@fujita-hu.ac.jp. 7. Department of Radiology, Fujita Health University, School of Medicine, 1-98, Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho, Toyoake, Aichi, 470-1192, Japan. Electronic address: y-obama@fujita-hu.ac.jp. 8. Department of Radiology, Fujita Health University, School of Medicine, 1-98, Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho, Toyoake, Aichi, 470-1192, Japan. Electronic address: h-ikeda@fujita-hu.ac.jp. 9. Canon Medical Systems Corporation, 1385, Shimoishigami, Otawara, Tochigi, 324-0036, Japan. Electronic address: masato.ikedo@medical.canon. 10. Canon Medical Systems Corporation, 1385, Shimoishigami, Otawara, Tochigi, 324-0036, Japan. Electronic address: masao.yui@medical.canon. 11. Joint Research Laboratory of Advanced Medical Imaging, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, 1-98, Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho, Toyoake, Aichi, 470-1192, Japan. Electronic address: kmura@fujita-hu.ac.jp. 12. Department of Radiology, Fujita Health University, School of Medicine, 1-98, Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho, Toyoake, Aichi, 470-1192, Japan. Electronic address: htoyama@fujita-hu.ac.jp.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To demonstrate the utility of compressed sensing with parallel imaging (Compressed SPEEDER) and AiCE compared with that of conventional parallel imaging (SPEEDER) for shortening examination time and improving image quality of women's pelvic MRI. METHOD: Thirty consecutive patients with women's pelvic diseases (mean age 50 years) underwent T2-weighted imaging using Compressed SPEEDER as well as conventional SPEEDER reconstructed with and without AiCE. The examination times were recorded, and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was calculated for every patient. Moreover, overall image quality was assessed using a 5-point scoring system, and final scores for all patients were determined by consensus of two readers. Mean examination time, SNR and overall image quality were compared among the four data sets by Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: Examination times for Compressed SPEEDER with and without AiCE were significantly shorter than those for conventional SPEEDER with and without AiCE (with AiCE: p < 0.0001, without AiCE: p < 0.0001). SNR of Compressed SPEEDER and of SPEEDER with AiCE was significantly superior to that of Compressed SPEEDER without AiCE (vs. Compressed SPEEDER, p = 0.01; vs. SPEEDER, p = 0.009). Overall image quality of Compressed SPEEDER with AiCE and of SPEEDER with and without AiCE was significantly higher than that of Compressed SPEEDER without AiCE (vs. Compressed SPEEDER with AiCE, p < 0.0001; vs. SPEEDER with AiCE, p < 0.0001; SPEEDER without AiCE, p = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: Image quality and shorten examination time for T2-weighted imaging in women's pelvic MRI can be significantly improved by using Compressed SPEEDER with AiCE in comparison with conventional SPEEDER, although other sequences were not tested.
PURPOSE: To demonstrate the utility of compressed sensing with parallel imaging (Compressed SPEEDER) and AiCE compared with that of conventional parallel imaging (SPEEDER) for shortening examination time and improving image quality of women's pelvic MRI. METHOD: Thirty consecutive patients with women's pelvic diseases (mean age 50 years) underwent T2-weighted imaging using Compressed SPEEDER as well as conventional SPEEDER reconstructed with and without AiCE. The examination times were recorded, and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was calculated for every patient. Moreover, overall image quality was assessed using a 5-point scoring system, and final scores for all patients were determined by consensus of two readers. Mean examination time, SNR and overall image quality were compared among the four data sets by Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: Examination times for Compressed SPEEDER with and without AiCE were significantly shorter than those for conventional SPEEDER with and without AiCE (with AiCE: p < 0.0001, without AiCE: p < 0.0001). SNR of Compressed SPEEDER and of SPEEDER with AiCE was significantly superior to that of Compressed SPEEDER without AiCE (vs. Compressed SPEEDER, p = 0.01; vs. SPEEDER, p = 0.009). Overall image quality of Compressed SPEEDER with AiCE and of SPEEDER with and without AiCE was significantly higher than that of Compressed SPEEDER without AiCE (vs. Compressed SPEEDER with AiCE, p < 0.0001; vs. SPEEDER with AiCE, p < 0.0001; SPEEDER without AiCE, p = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: Image quality and shorten examination time for T2-weighted imaging in women's pelvic MRI can be significantly improved by using Compressed SPEEDER with AiCE in comparison with conventional SPEEDER, although other sequences were not tested.