Kazama Toshiki, Nagafuji Yui, Niikura Naoki, Okamura Takuho, Van Cauteren Marc, Obara Makoto, Takano Susumu, Konta Natsuo, Horie Tomohiko, Takahara Taro, Kumaki Nobue, Niwa Tetsu, Hashimoto Jun
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Kanagawa, Japan.
Department of Breast Oncology, Tokai University School of Medicine, Isehara, Kanagawa, Japan.
Magn Reson Med Sci. 2024 Jul 26. doi: 10.2463/mrms.mp.2023-0151.
High b-value acquisition and diffusion-weighted imaging with background suppression (DWIBS) are desirable in high-specificity breast cancer diagnosis on non-contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging; however, this inherently results in a lower signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). Compressed sensitivity encoding (C-SENSE), which combines SENSE with compressed sensing, improves the SNR by reducing noise. Recent technological improvements allow us to incorporate this acceleration technique into echo-planar imaging, called echo-planar imaging with C-SENSE (EPICS). This study aimed to compare image quality and reliability of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) between DWIBS obtained using SENSE and EPICS in patients with small breast cancers.
Thirty-seven patients with pathologically confirmed breast cancer underwent DWIBS, and images were reconstructed using both conventional SENSE (SENSE-DWIBS) and EPICS (EPICS-DWIBS). Two board-certified radiologists independently evaluated lesion conspicuity (LC) and noise using a 5-point grading scale. The same 2 radiologists independently measured SNR, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and the mean cancer ADC. The Pearson coefficient and Bland-Altman plot were applied to assess the accuracy of ADCs.
LC scores were higher with EPICS than with SENSE, reaching significance for one reviewer but not the other reviewer. Noise ratings on visual evaluation were significantly lower with EPICS than with SENSE (P < 0.001 for both reviewers). SNR was significantly higher with EPICS than with SENSE (P < 0.005 for both reviewers). CNR was significantly higher with EPICS than with SENSE (P < 0.001 for both reviewers). Bland-Altman plots of cancer ADCs using EPICS-DWIBS and SENSE-DWIBS showed excellent concordance, with a bias of 0.026 × 10 mm/s and limits of agreement ranging 0.054 × 10 mm/s; the Pearson's correlation coefficient was 0.997 (P < 0.0001).
EPICS enhances breast DWIBS image quality, with improved SNR and CNR and reduced noise levels. The ADCs of breast cancers obtained using EPICS were almost perfectly correlated with those obtained using conventional SENSE.
在非增强磁共振成像的高特异性乳腺癌诊断中,高b值采集和背景抑制扩散加权成像(DWIBS)是理想的;然而,这本质上会导致较低的信噪比(SNR)。压缩灵敏度编码(C-SENSE)将灵敏度编码(SENSE)与压缩感知相结合,通过降低噪声来提高SNR。最近的技术改进使我们能够将这种加速技术纳入回波平面成像,即采用C-SENSE的回波平面成像(EPICS)。本研究旨在比较在小乳腺癌患者中,使用SENSE和EPICS获得的DWIBS之间的图像质量和表观扩散系数(ADC)的可靠性。
37例经病理证实的乳腺癌患者接受了DWIBS检查,并使用传统的SENSE(SENSE-DWIBS)和EPICS(EPICS-DWIBS)重建图像。两名获得委员会认证的放射科医生使用5分制分级量表独立评估病变的清晰度(LC)和噪声。同样的2名放射科医生独立测量SNR、对比噪声比(CNR)和平均癌灶ADC。应用Pearson系数和Bland-Altman图来评估ADC的准确性。
EPICS的LC评分高于SENSE,一名评估者达到显著差异,另一名评估者未达到。视觉评估的噪声等级EPICS显著低于SENSE(两名评估者均P < 0.001)。EPICS的SNR显著高于SENSE(两名评估者均P < 0.005)。EPICS 的CNR显著高于SENSE(两名评估者均P < 0.001)。使用EPICS-DWIBS和SENSE-DWIBS的癌灶ADC的Bland-Altman图显示出极好的一致性,偏差为0.026×10⁻³mm²/s,一致性界限范围为0.054×10⁻³mm²/s;Pearson相关系数为0.997(P < 0.0001)。
EPICS提高了乳腺DWIBS的图像质量,改善了SNR和CNR,并降低了噪声水平。使用EPICS获得的乳腺癌ADC与使用传统SENSE获得的ADC几乎完全相关。