From the Division of Cardiovascular Imaging, Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC.
Department of Radiology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.
Invest Radiol. 2019 Dec;54(12):752-756. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000592.
Balanced steady-state free precession-based quiescent-interval slice-selective (bSSFP QISS) magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) is accurate for the noncontrast evaluation of peripheral arterial disease (PAD); however, drawbacks include the need for breath-holding when imaging the abdomen and pelvis, and sensitivity to off-resonance artifacts. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the image quality and diagnostic accuracy in the pelvis and abdomen of free-breathing fast low-angle shot-based QISS (FLASH QISS) techniques in comparison to bSSFP QISS in patients with PAD, using computed tomographic angiography as the reference.
Twenty-seven patients (69 ± 10 years, 17 men) with PAD were enrolled in this institutional review board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant prospective study between April and December 2018. Patients underwent noncontrast MRA using standard bSSFP QISS and prototype free-breathing radial-FLASH and Cartesian-FLASH QISS at 3 T. A subset of patients (n = 22) also underwent computed tomographic angiography as the reference standard. Nine arterial segments per patient were evaluated spanning the abdomen, pelvis, and upper thigh regions. Objective (signal intensity ratio and relative standard deviation) and subjective image quality (4-point scale) and stenosis (>50%) were evaluated by 2 readers and compared using one-way analysis of variance, Wilcoxon, and McNemar tests, respectively.
A total of 179 vascular segments were available for analysis by all QISS techniques. No significant difference was observed among bSSFP, radial-FLASH, and Cartesian-FLASH QISS techniques in signal intensity ratio (P = 0.428) and relative standard deviation (P = 0.220). Radial-FLASH QISS demonstrated the best image quality (P < 0.0001) and the highest interreader agreement (κ = 0.721). The sensitivity values of bSSFP, radial-FLASH, and Cartesian-FLASH QISS for the detection of greater than 50% stenosis were 76.0%, 84.0%, and 80.0%, respectively, whereas specificity values were 97.6%, 94.0%, and 92.8%, respectively. Moreover, FLASH QISS consistently reduced off-resonance artifacts compared with bSSFP QISS.
Free-breathing FLASH QISS MRA techniques provide improved image quality and sensitivity, high specificity, and reduced off-resonance artifacts for vascular stenosis detection in the abdomen and pelvis.
基于平衡稳态自由进动的静止期片选(bSSFP QISS)磁共振血管造影(MRA)在非对比评估外周动脉疾病(PAD)方面具有较高的准确性,但存在需要屏气来扫描腹部和骨盆以及对离共振伪影敏感等缺点。本研究旨在比较 bSSFP QISS 与自由呼吸快速低角度激发的基于片选(FLASH QISS)技术在 PAD 患者盆腔和腹部的图像质量和诊断准确性,以计算机断层血管造影(CTA)作为参考。
2018 年 4 月至 12 月,这项机构审查委员会批准的、符合《健康保险流通与责任法案》的前瞻性研究共纳入 27 例 PAD 患者(69 ± 10 岁,17 名男性)。患者在 3T 磁共振扫描仪上接受标准 bSSFP QISS 及原型自由呼吸径向 FLASH 和笛卡尔 FLASH QISS 非对比 MRA。一部分患者(n = 22)也接受 CTA 作为参考标准。每位患者评估 9 个动脉段,涵盖腹部、骨盆和大腿区域。由 2 名读者使用单向方差分析、Wilcoxon 检验和 McNemar 检验分别评估客观(信号强度比和相对标准偏差)和主观图像质量(4 分制)和狭窄(>50%),并进行比较。
共分析了 179 个血管段,所有 QISS 技术之间的信号强度比(P = 0.428)和相对标准偏差(P = 0.220)无显著差异。与 bSSFP、径向 FLASH 和笛卡尔 FLASH QISS 相比,径向 FLASH QISS 显示出最佳的图像质量(P < 0.0001)和最高的读者间一致性(κ = 0.721)。bSSFP、径向 FLASH 和笛卡尔 FLASH QISS 检测大于 50%狭窄的敏感性分别为 76.0%、84.0%和 80.0%,特异性分别为 97.6%、94.0%和 92.8%。此外,FLASH QISS 可较 bSSFP QISS 一致地减少离共振伪影。
自由呼吸 FLASH QISS MRA 技术在腹部和骨盆血管狭窄的检测中,提供了更好的图像质量和敏感性、高特异性和减少的离共振伪影。