Department of Radiology, Union Hospital, School of Medical Technology and Engineering, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Department of Radiology, Union Hospital, School of Medical Technology and Engineering, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Eur J Radiol. 2021 Sep;142:109833. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109833. Epub 2021 Jun 24.
To evaluate the image quality and image consistency between 3D Breath-hold (BH)-MRCP with parallel imaging (3D-BH-PI-MRCP) and 3D-BH compressed sensing (CS)-MRCP (3D-BH-CS-MRCP) in patients with suspected pancreaticobiliary diseases, compared with 3D navigator-triggered (NT)-MRCP.
The A total number of 109 patients who underwent 3D-NT-MRCP, 3D-BH-PI-MRCP and 3D-BH-CS-MRCP were prospectively enrolled in this study. The Friedman test was performed to compare quantitative values, image acquisition time, the presence of artifacts, overall image quality, and duct visualization among the three protocols. Additionally, we compared 3D-BH-PI-MRCP and 3D-BH-CS-MRCP with 3D-NT-MRCP in morphological consistency of main pancreatic duct and common bile duct (CBD) based on overall image quality score of = 4.
Three MRCP methods were successfully performed in all the patients. The contrast ratio, SNR and CNR of the CBD were significantly higher for 3D-BH-CS-MRCP than those for 3D-NT-MRCP and 3D-BH-PI-MRCP images. Overall image quality did differ significantly across the three sequences. Visualization of the CBD, RHD, LHD, anterior branch, posterior branch and cystic duct was similar with the 3D-BH-CS-MRCP and 3D-BH-PI-MRCP sequences. In contrast, segment 2 or 3 branch and main pancreatic duct visualization were significantly better with 3D-BH-PI-MRCP than with 3D-BH-CS-MRCP and 3D-NT-MRCP (p < 0.001).
Both the two breath-hold approaches were considering the time-saving advantages without deterioration of image quality. Compared with 3D-BH-CS-MRCP, 3D-BH-PI-MRCP yielded significantly better visualization of the segment 2 and 3 branch of the intrahepatic duct and performed better consistency in main pancreatic duct and common bile duct morphology.
评估疑似胰胆管疾病患者的三维屏气（BH）-MRCP 并行成像（3D-BH-PI-MRCP）和 3D-BH 压缩感知（CS）-MRCP（3D-BH-CS-MRCP）与三维导航触发（NT）-MRCP 之间的图像质量和图像一致性。
本研究前瞻性纳入了 109 例接受 3D-NT-MRCP、3D-BH-PI-MRCP 和 3D-BH-CS-MRCP 的患者。采用 Friedman 检验比较三种方案的定量值、图像采集时间、伪影的存在、总体图像质量以及胆管可视化情况。此外，我们还根据总体图像质量评分=4，比较了 3D-BH-PI-MRCP 和 3D-BH-CS-MRCP 与 3D-NT-MRCP 在主胰管和胆总管（CBD）形态学一致性方面的差异。
所有患者均成功完成了三种 MRCP 方法。3D-BH-CS-MRCP 图像的 CBD 对比度、信噪比和 CNR 均明显高于 3D-NT-MRCP 和 3D-BH-PI-MRCP 图像。三种序列的总体图像质量存在显著差异。CBD、RHD、LHD、前支、后支和胆囊管的可视化效果在 3D-BH-CS-MRCP 和 3D-BH-PI-MRCP 序列中相似。相比之下，3D-BH-PI-MRCP 对第 2 或 3 分支和主胰管的可视化效果明显优于 3D-BH-CS-MRCP 和 3D-NT-MRCP（p<0.001）。
两种屏气方法均具有节省时间的优势，且不影响图像质量。与 3D-BH-CS-MRCP 相比，3D-BH-PI-MRCP 对肝内胆管第 2 和第 3 分支的可视化效果更好，且在主胰管和胆总管形态学方面的一致性更好。
