T-W Baek1, Y Kang2, H-J Lee1. 1. Department of Radiology (T.-W.B., Y.K., H.-J.L.), Haeundae Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea. 2. Department of Radiology (T.-W.B., Y.K., H.-J.L.), Haeundae Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, Busan, Korea bsb2312@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Contrast-enhanced 3D-turbo spin-echo (TSE) black-blood sequence has gained attention, as it suppresses signals from vessels and provides an increased contrast-noise ratio. The purpose was to investigate which among the contrast-enhanced 3D T1 TSE, 3D T1 fast-spoiled gradient echo (FSPGR), and 3D T2 FLAIR sequences can better detect cranial nerve contrast enhancement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with cranial neuritis based on clinical findings (n = 20) and control participants (n = 20) were retrospectively included in this study. All patients underwent 3T MR imaging with contrast-enhanced 3D T1 TSE, 3D T1 FSPGR, and 3D T2 FLAIR. Experienced and inexperienced reviewers independently evaluated the 3 sequences to compare their diagnostic performance and time required to reach the diagnosis. Additionally, tube phantoms containing varying concentrations of gadobutrol solution were scanned using the 3 sequences. RESULTS: For the inexperienced reader, the 3D T1 TSE sequence showed significantly higher sensitivity (80% versus 50%, P = .049; 80% versus 55%; P = .040), specificity (100% versus 65%, P = .004; 100% versus 60%; P = .001), and accuracy (90% versus 57.5%, P = .001; 90% versus 57.5%, P = .001) than the 3D T1 FSPGR and 3D T2 FLAIR sequences in patients with cranial neuritis. For the experienced reader, the 3D T1-based sequences showed significantly higher sensitivity than the 3D T2 FLAIR sequence (85% versus 30%, P < .001; 3D T1 TSE versus 3D T2 FLAIR, 85% versus 30%, P < .001; 3D T1 FSPGR versus 3D T2 FLAIR). For both readers, the 3D T1 TSE sequence showed the highest area under the curve (inexperienced reader; 0.91, experienced reader; 0.87), and time to diagnosis was significantly shorter with 3D T1 TSE than with 3D T1 FSPGR. CONCLUSIONS: The 3D T1 TSE sequence may be clinically useful in evaluating abnormal cranial nerve enhancement, especially for inexperienced readers.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Contrast-enhanced 3D-turbo spin-echo (TSE) black-blood sequence has gained attention, as it suppresses signals from vessels and provides an increased contrast-noise ratio. The purpose was to investigate which among the contrast-enhanced 3D T1 TSE, 3D T1 fast-spoiled gradient echo (FSPGR), and 3D T2 FLAIR sequences can better detect cranial nerve contrast enhancement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with cranial neuritis based on clinical findings (n = 20) and control participants (n = 20) were retrospectively included in this study. All patients underwent 3T MR imaging with contrast-enhanced 3D T1 TSE, 3D T1 FSPGR, and 3D T2 FLAIR. Experienced and inexperienced reviewers independently evaluated the 3 sequences to compare their diagnostic performance and time required to reach the diagnosis. Additionally, tube phantoms containing varying concentrations of gadobutrol solution were scanned using the 3 sequences. RESULTS: For the inexperienced reader, the 3D T1 TSE sequence showed significantly higher sensitivity (80% versus 50%, P = .049; 80% versus 55%; P = .040), specificity (100% versus 65%, P = .004; 100% versus 60%; P = .001), and accuracy (90% versus 57.5%, P = .001; 90% versus 57.5%, P = .001) than the 3D T1 FSPGR and 3D T2 FLAIR sequences in patients with cranial neuritis. For the experienced reader, the 3D T1-based sequences showed significantly higher sensitivity than the 3D T2 FLAIR sequence (85% versus 30%, P < .001; 3D T1 TSE versus 3D T2 FLAIR, 85% versus 30%, P < .001; 3D T1 FSPGR versus 3D T2 FLAIR). For both readers, the 3D T1 TSE sequence showed the highest area under the curve (inexperienced reader; 0.91, experienced reader; 0.87), and time to diagnosis was significantly shorter with 3D T1 TSE than with 3D T1 FSPGR. CONCLUSIONS: The 3D T1 TSE sequence may be clinically useful in evaluating abnormal cranial nerve enhancement, especially for inexperienced readers.
Authors: H K Lim; J H Lee; D Hyun; J W Park; J L Kim; H y Lee; S Park; J H Ahn; J H Baek; C G Choi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-12-29 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: E Le Rhun; M Weller; D Brandsma; M Van den Bent; E de Azambuja; R Henriksson; T Boulanger; S Peters; C Watts; W Wick; P Wesseling; R Rudà; M Preusser Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: H Fukuoka; T Hirai; T Okuda; Y Shigematsu; A Sasao; E Kimura; T Hirano; S Yano; R Murakami; Y Yamashita Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2009-12-24 Impact factor: 3.825