van Wijk Diederik F, Strang Aart C, Duivenvoorden Raphael, Enklaar Dirk-Jan F, Zwinderman Aeilko H, van der Geest Rob J, Kastelein John J P, de Groot Eric, Stroes Erik S G, Nederveen Aart J
Department of Vascular Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
PLoS One. 2015 Jul 10;10(7):e0130878. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130878. eCollection 2015.
Different in-plane resolutions have been used for carotid 3T MRI. We compared the reproducibility, as well as the within- and between reader variability of high and routinely used spatial resolution in scans of patients with atherosclerotic carotid artery disease. Since no consensus exists about the optimal segmentation method, we analysed all imaging data using two different segmentation methods.
In 31 patient with carotid atherosclerosis a high (0.25 × 0.25 mm2; HR) and routinely used (0.50 × 0.50 mm2; LR) spatial resolution carotid MRI scan were performed within one month. A fully blinded closed and a simultaneously open segmentation were used to quantify the lipid rich necrotic core (LRNC), calcified and loose matrix (LM) plaque area and the fibrous cap (FC) thickness.
No significant differences were observed between scan-rescan reproducibility for HR versus LR measurements, nor did we find any significant difference between the within-reader and between-reader reproducibility. The same applies for differences between the open and closed reads. All intraclass correlation coefficients between scans and rescans for the LRNC, calcified and LM plaque area, as well as the FC thickness measurements with the open segmentation method were excellent (all above 0.75).
Increasing the spatial resolution at the expense of the contrast-to-noise ratio does not improve carotid plaque component scan-rescan reproducibility in patients with atherosclerotic carotid disease, nor does using a different segmentation method.
在颈动脉3T磁共振成像(MRI)中采用了不同的平面分辨率。我们比较了在动脉粥样硬化性颈动脉疾病患者扫描中,高空间分辨率和常规使用的空间分辨率的可重复性,以及阅片者内部和阅片者之间的变异性。由于关于最佳分割方法尚无共识,我们使用两种不同的分割方法分析了所有成像数据。
对31例颈动脉粥样硬化患者在1个月内进行了高空间分辨率(0.25×0.25mm²;HR)和常规使用的空间分辨率(0.50×0.50mm²;LR)的颈动脉MRI扫描。采用完全盲法封闭分割和同时开放分割来量化富含脂质的坏死核心(LRNC)、钙化和疏松基质(LM)斑块面积以及纤维帽(FC)厚度。
HR测量与LR测量的扫描-再扫描可重复性之间未观察到显著差异,阅片者内部和阅片者之间的可重复性也未发现显著差异。开放阅读和封闭阅读之间的差异也是如此。采用开放分割方法时,LRNC、钙化和LM斑块面积以及FC厚度测量的所有扫描与再扫描之间的组内相关系数均极佳(均高于0.75)。
以牺牲对比度-噪声比为代价提高空间分辨率,并不会改善动脉粥样硬化性颈动脉疾病患者颈动脉斑块成分的扫描-再扫描可重复性,使用不同的分割方法也不会改善。