腹部自由呼吸动态对比增强磁共振成像的可行性：CAIPIRINHA-VIBE、KWIC重建的径向-VIBE与传统VIBE的比较
Feasibility of free-breathing dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the abdomen: a comparison between CAIPIRINHA-VIBE, Radial-VIBE with KWIC reconstruction and conventional VIBE.
作者信息
Seo Nieun, Park Seong J, Kim Bohyun, Lee Chang K, Huh Jimi, Kim Jeong K, Lee Seung S, Kim In S, Nickel Dominik, Kim Kyung W
机构信息
1 Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
2 Department of Radiology, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
出版信息
Br J Radiol. 2016 Oct;89(1066):20160150. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20160150. Epub 2016 Aug 9.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the feasibilities of controlled aliasing in parallel imaging results in higher acceleration with volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination (CAIPIRINHA-VIBE), radial acquisition of VIBE (Radial-VIBE) with k-space-weighted image contrast (KWIC) reconstruction (KWIC-Radial-VIBE) and conventional-VIBE (c-VIBE) for free-breathing dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI of the abdomen.
METHODS
23 prospectively enrolled patients underwent DCE-MRI of the abdomen with CAIPIRINHA-VIBE (n = 10), KWIC-Radial-VIBE (n = 6) or c-VIBE (n = 7). Qualitative image quality of the DCE-MR images and perfusion maps was independently scored by two abdominal radiologists using a 5-point scale (from 1, uninterpretable, to 5, very good). For quantitative analysis, the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the liver and goodness-of-fit (GOF) of the time-intensity curve were measured.
RESULTS
In the three tested sequences, DCE-MRI had good temporal (5 s) and spatial resolution (1.48 × 1.48 × 4 mm/voxel). Interobserver agreement in the qualitative analysis was good (ĸ = 0.753; 95% confidence interval, 0.610-0.895). Therefore, the mean scores were used in the data analysis. Overall image quality was comparable between CAIPIRINHA-VIBE (3.52 ± 0.55) and KWIC-Radial-VIBE (3.72 ± 0.37; p = 1.000), and both were significantly better than c-VIBE (2.71 ± 0.34; p < 0.001). Perfusion map quality score was highest with KWIC-Radial-VIBE (4.33 ± 0.65), followed by CAIPIRINHA-VIBE (3.70 ± 0.73) and c-VIBE (3.14 ± 0.66), but without statistical significance between CAIPIRINHA-VIBE and KWIC-Radial-VIBE (p = 0.167). The SNR of the liver and GOF of the time-intensity curve did not significantly differ between the three sequences (p = 0.116 and 0.224, respectively).
CONCLUSION
CAIPIRINHA-VIBE and KWIC-Radial-VIBE provide comparably better performance than c-VIBE. Both can be feasible sequences with acceptable good image quality for free-breathing DCE-MRI.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE
CAIPIRINHA-VIBE and KWIC-Radial-VIBE provide comparably better quality of free-breathing DCE-MRIs than c-VIBE.
目的
评估并行成像中的可控混叠技术结合容积内插屏气检查（CAIPIRINHA-VIBE）、采用k空间加权图像对比度（KWIC）重建的VIBE序列径向采集（Radial-VIBE）及传统VIBE序列（c-VIBE）用于腹部自由呼吸动态对比增强（DCE）磁共振成像（MRI）时实现更高加速率的可行性。
方法
23例前瞻性入组患者接受腹部DCE-MRI检查，其中10例采用CAIPIRINHA-VIBE序列，6例采用KWIC-Radial-VIBE序列，7例采用c-VIBE序列。由两名腹部放射科医生独立使用5分制（从1分不可解读到5分非常好）对DCE-MR图像和灌注图的定性图像质量进行评分。进行定量分析时，测量肝脏的信噪比（SNR）和时间-强度曲线的拟合优度（GOF）。
结果
在三个测试序列中，DCE-MRI具有良好的时间分辨率（5秒）和空间分辨率（1.48×1.48×4毫米/体素）。定性分析中的观察者间一致性良好（ĸ = 0.753；95%置信区间，0.610 - 0.895）。因此，在数据分析中使用平均得分。CAIPIRINHA-VIBE序列（3.52±0.55）和KWIC-Radial-VIBE序列（3.72±0.37；p = 1.000）的整体图像质量相当，且均显著优于c-VIBE序列（2.71±0.34；p < 0.001）。KWIC-Radial-VIBE序列的灌注图质量评分最高（4.33±0.65），其次是CAIPIRINHA-VIBE序列（3.70±0.73）和c-VIBE序列（3.14±0.66），但CAIPIRINHA-VIBE序列和KWIC-Radial-VIBE序列之间无统计学差异（p = 0.167）。三个序列之间肝脏的SNR和时间-强度曲线的GOF无显著差异（分别为p = 0.116和0.224）。
结论
CAIPIRINHA-VIBE序列和KWIC-Radial-VIBE序列的性能比c-VIBE序列更好。两者均可作为腹部自由呼吸DCE-MRI具有可接受良好图像质量的可行序列。
知识进展
CAIPIRINHA-VIBE序列和KWIC-Radial-VIBE序列用于腹部自由呼吸DCE-MRI时提供的图像质量比c-VIBE序列更好。
Zotero 插件