Núcleo de Pesquisas Tecnológicas, Universidade de Mogi das Cruzes, Mogi das Cruzes, São Paulo, Brasil.
Biomed Eng Online. 2014 Mar 27;13(1):33. doi: 10.1186/1475-925X-13-33.
Conventional spin-echo (PD-CSE) and fast spin-echo (PD-FSE) techniques are frequently used to detect meniscal tears. However, the time delay for imaging with PD-CSE has resulted in its replacement with faster techniques, such as proton density fast spin-echo (PD-FSE), which has become a frequent tool at most diagnostic centres.Qualitative analysis shows that the PD-CSE technique is more sensitive, but other authors have not found significant differences between the aforementioned techniques. Therefore, we performed a quantitative analysis in this study that aims to measure differences in the quality of the images obtained with both techniques.
We compared the PD-CSE and PD-FSE techniques by quantitatively analysing the obtained proton density images: the area shown, as well as the brightness and lesion contrast of the obtained image.A set of 100 images from 50 patients thought to contain meniscal tears of the knee were selected. These 100 images were obtained from all individuals using both the PD-CSE and PD-FSE techniques. The images were processed using software developed in Delphi. In addition to these quantifications, three physicians, who are specialists in radiology and capable of analysing magnetic resonance (MR) images of the musculoskeletal system, qualitatively analysed the diagnostic sensitivity of both techniques.
On average, samples obtained via the PD-CSE technique contained 22% more pixels in the lesion area. The contrast differed by 28%, and the brightness differed by 31%. The two techniques were correlated using Student's t-test, which showed a statistically significant difference. The specialists detected meniscal tears in 30 of the images obtained via the PD-CSE technique, while only 72% of these cases were detected via the PD-FSE technique.
The PD-CSE technique was shown to be superior to PD-FSE for all of the evaluated properties, making its selection preferable.
传统的自旋回波（PD-CSE）和快速自旋回波（PD-FSE）技术常用于检测半月板撕裂。然而，PD-CSE 成像的时滞导致其被更快的技术所取代，如质子密度快速自旋回波（PD-FSE），该技术已成为大多数诊断中心的常用工具。定性分析表明，PD-CSE 技术更敏感，但其他作者并未发现上述技术之间存在显著差异。因此，我们在这项研究中进行了定量分析，旨在测量两种技术获得的图像质量差异。
我们通过定量分析获得的质子密度图像来比较 PD-CSE 和 PD-FSE 技术：显示的区域以及获得图像的亮度和病变对比度。从 50 名疑似膝关节半月板撕裂的患者中选择了 100 张图像。使用 PD-CSE 和 PD-FSE 技术从所有个体中获得了这 100 张图像。使用 Delphi 开发的软件对图像进行了处理。除了这些定量分析之外，三位放射学专家还对两种技术的诊断灵敏度进行了定性分析，他们能够分析骨骼肌肉系统的磁共振（MR）图像。
平均而言，PD-CSE 技术获得的样本中病变区域的像素多 22%。对比度差异 28%，亮度差异 31%。使用学生 t 检验对两种技术进行相关性分析，结果显示存在统计学差异。专家在 PD-CSE 技术获得的 30 张图像中检测到半月板撕裂，而 PD-FSE 技术仅检测到 72%的此类病例。
PD-CSE 技术在所有评估属性上均优于 PD-FSE，因此选择该技术更为可取。
