Literature DB >> 35583667

Assessment of 2D conventional and synthetic MRI in multiple sclerosis.

Francesc Xavier Aymerich1,2, Cristina Auger3, Julio Alonso3, Andrea Barros3, Margareta A Clarke3, Juan Mora3, Georgina Arrambide4, Juan Francisco Corral3, Ana Andrino3, Jaume Sastre-Garriga4, Alex Rovira3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To qualitatively and quantitatively compare synthetic and conventional MRI sequences acquired on a 1.5-T system for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS).
METHODS: Prospective study that involved twenty-seven consecutive relapsing-remitting MS patients scanned on a 1.5-T MRI scanner. The MRI protocol included 2D transverse conventional spin-echo sequences: proton density-weighted (PD), T2-weighted, T2-FLAIR, and T1-weighted. Synthetic images were generated using 2D transverse QRAPMASTER and SyMRI software with the same voxel size, repetition, echo, and inversion times as the conventional sequences. Four raters performed a crosstab qualitative analysis that involved evaluating global image quality, contrast, flow artefacts, and confidence in lesion assessment introducing the concepts of predominance, agreement, and disagreement. A quantitative analysis was also performed and included evaluating the number of lesions (periventricular, juxtacortical, brainstem, and cerebellum) and the contrast-to-noise ratio between regions (CSF, white matter, grey matter, lesions).
RESULTS: The global image quality assessment showed predominance for better scores for conventional sequences over synthetic sequences, whereas contrast, confidence in lesion assessment, and flow artefacts showed predominance for agreement between sequences. There was predominance for disagreement between all pairs of raters in most of the evaluated qualitative parameters. Synthetic PD and T2-FLAIR images showed higher contrast-to-noise ratios than the corresponding conventional images for most comparison between regions. There were no significant differences in the number of lesions detected for most of the study regions between conventional and synthetic images.
CONCLUSION: Synthetic MRI can be potentially used as an alternative to conventional brain MRI sequences in the assessment of MS.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Brain; Magnetic resonance imaging; Multiple sclerosis; Synthetic MRI

Year:  2022        PMID: 35583667     DOI: 10.1007/s00234-022-02973-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroradiology        ISSN: 0028-3940            Impact factor:   2.804


  10 in total

1.  Brain imaging with synthetic MR in children: clinical quality assessment.

Authors:  Aaron M Betts; James L Leach; Blaise V Jones; Bin Zhang; Suraj Serai
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2016-07-20       Impact factor: 2.804

2.  Rapid magnetic resonance quantification on the brain: Optimization for clinical usage.

Authors:  J B M Warntjes; O Dahlqvist Leinhard; J West; P Lundberg
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 4.668

Review 3.  Evidence-based guidelines: MAGNIMS consensus guidelines on the use of MRI in multiple sclerosis-clinical implementation in the diagnostic process.

Authors:  Àlex Rovira; Mike P Wattjes; Mar Tintoré; Carmen Tur; Tarek A Yousry; Maria P Sormani; Nicola De Stefano; Massimo Filippi; Cristina Auger; Maria A Rocca; Frederik Barkhof; Franz Fazekas; Ludwig Kappos; Chris Polman; David Miller; Xavier Montalban
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurol       Date:  2015-07-07       Impact factor: 42.937

4.  Synthetic MRI for Clinical Neuroimaging: Results of the Magnetic Resonance Image Compilation (MAGiC) Prospective, Multicenter, Multireader Trial.

Authors:  L N Tanenbaum; A J Tsiouris; A N Johnson; T P Naidich; M C DeLano; E R Melhem; P Quarterman; S X Parameswaran; A Shankaranarayanan; M Goyen; A S Field
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 5.  Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria.

Authors:  Alan J Thompson; Brenda L Banwell; Frederik Barkhof; William M Carroll; Timothy Coetzee; Giancarlo Comi; Jorge Correale; Franz Fazekas; Massimo Filippi; Mark S Freedman; Kazuo Fujihara; Steven L Galetta; Hans Peter Hartung; Ludwig Kappos; Fred D Lublin; Ruth Ann Marrie; Aaron E Miller; David H Miller; Xavier Montalban; Ellen M Mowry; Per Soelberg Sorensen; Mar Tintoré; Anthony L Traboulsee; Maria Trojano; Bernard M J Uitdehaag; Sandra Vukusic; Emmanuelle Waubant; Brian G Weinshenker; Stephen C Reingold; Jeffrey A Cohen
Journal:  Lancet Neurol       Date:  2017-12-21       Impact factor: 44.182

6.  Synthetic MRI of the brain in a clinical setting.

Authors:  I Blystad; J B M Warntjes; O Smedby; A-M Landtblom; P Lundberg; E-M Larsson
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  2012-09-27       Impact factor: 1.990

7.  Synthetic MRI in the Detection of Multiple Sclerosis Plaques.

Authors:  A Hagiwara; M Hori; K Yokoyama; M Y Takemura; C Andica; T Tabata; K Kamagata; M Suzuki; K K Kumamaru; M Nakazawa; N Takano; H Kawasaki; N Hamasaki; A Kunimatsu; S Aoki
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2016-12-08       Impact factor: 3.825

8.  Clinical Feasibility of Synthetic MRI in Multiple Sclerosis: A Diagnostic and Volumetric Validation Study.

Authors:  T Granberg; M Uppman; F Hashim; C Cananau; L E Nordin; S Shams; J Berglund; Y Forslin; P Aspelin; S Fredrikson; M Kristoffersen-Wiberg
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 3.825

9.  Conventional and synthetic MRI in multiple sclerosis: a comparative study.

Authors:  Wolfgang Krauss; Martin Gunnarsson; Margareta Nilsson; Per Thunberg
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-11-13       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 10.  MAGNIMS consensus recommendations on the use of brain and spinal cord atrophy measures in clinical practice.

Authors:  Jaume Sastre-Garriga; Deborah Pareto; Marco Battaglini; Maria A Rocca; Olga Ciccarelli; Christian Enzinger; Jens Wuerfel; Maria P Sormani; Frederik Barkhof; Tarek A Yousry; Nicola De Stefano; Mar Tintoré; Massimo Filippi; Claudio Gasperini; Ludwig Kappos; Jordi Río; Jette Frederiksen; Jackie Palace; Hugo Vrenken; Xavier Montalban; Àlex Rovira
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurol       Date:  2020-02-24       Impact factor: 42.937

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.