Wan Qi, Lei Qiang, Wang Peng, Hu Jianfeng, Zhang Tianjing, Yu Deng, Li Xinchun, Liang Changhong
Department of Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University.
Philips Healthcare, Guangzhou, China.
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2020 May/Jun;44(3):334-340. doi: 10.1097/RCT.0000000000001004.
The aim of the study was to compare intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for evaluating lung cancer using single-shot turbo spin-echo (TSE) and single-shot echo-planar imaging (EPI) in a 3T MR system.
Both single-shot TSE-DWI and single-shot EPI-DWI were scanned twice respectively for 15 patients with lung cancer. Distortion ratio, signal-to-noise ratio, and contrast-to-noise ratio were compared between the 2 techniques. The Bland-Altman analysis was performed to analyze reproducibility between the parameters of TSE-DWI and EPI-DWI. Short-term test-retest repeatability, as well as interobserver agreement, was evaluated using the coefficient of variation (CV) and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
Turbo spin-echo DWI has lower signal-to-noise ratio and similar contrast-to-noise ratio compared with EPI-DWI. Distortion ratio of TSE-DWI was significantly smaller than that of EPI-DWI. The apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and true diffusivity (D) of TSE-DWI showed higher values than those of EPI-DWI. The Bland-Altman analysis showed unacceptable limits of agreement between these 2 sequences. Test-retest repeatability was good for ADC and D of EPI-DWI (CV, 14.11%-16.60% and 17.08%-19.53%) and excellent for ADC and D of TSE-DWI (CV, 4.8%-6.19% and 6.05%-8.71%), but relatively poor for perfusion fraction (f) and pseudo-diffusion coefficient (D*) (CV, 25.95%-27.70% and 56.92%-71.84% for EPI, 23.67%-28.67% and 60.85%-70.17% for TSE). For interobserver agreement, both techniques were good to excellent in ADC and D (The lower limit of 95% confidence interval for ICC was almost all greater than 0.75), whereas D* and f had higher interobserver variabilities with D* of TSE-DWI showing poorest reproducibility (ICC, -0.27 to 0.12).
Lung DWI or IVIM using TSE could provide distortion-free images and improve the test-retest robustness of ADC and D as compared with EPI-DWI; however, it might exert a negative effect on perfusion parameter D*.
本研究旨在比较在3T磁共振系统中使用单次激发快速自旋回波(TSE)和单次激发平面回波成像(EPI)的体素内不相干运动扩散加权成像(DWI)评估肺癌的情况。
对15例肺癌患者分别进行单次激发TSE-DWI和单次激发EPI-DWI扫描,各扫描两次。比较两种技术的畸变率、信噪比和对比噪声比。采用Bland-Altman分析评估TSE-DWI和EPI-DWI参数之间的可重复性。使用变异系数(CV)和组内相关系数(ICC)评估短期重测重复性以及观察者间一致性。
与EPI-DWI相比,快速自旋回波DWI的信噪比更低,对比噪声比相似。TSE-DWI的畸变率显著小于EPI-DWI。TSE-DWI的表观扩散系数(ADC)和真实扩散系数(D)值高于EPI-DWI。Bland-Altman分析显示这两种序列之间的一致性界限不可接受。EPI-DWI的ADC和D的重测重复性良好(CV,14.11%-16.60%和17.08%-19.53%),TSE-DWI的ADC和D的重测重复性极佳(CV,4.8%-6.19%和6.05%-8.71%),但灌注分数(f)和伪扩散系数(D*)的重测重复性相对较差(EPI的CV,25.95%-27.70%和56.92%-71.84%;TSE的CV,23.67%-28.67%和60.85%-70.17%)。对于观察者间一致性,两种技术在ADC和D方面均为良好至优秀(ICC的95%置信区间下限几乎均大于0.75),而D和f的观察者间变异性较高,TSE-DWI的D显示出最差的可重复性(ICC,-0.27至0.12)。
与EPI-DWI相比,使用TSE的肺部DWI或体素内不相干运动成像可提供无畸变图像,并提高ADC和D的重测稳健性;然而,它可能对灌注参数D*产生负面影响。