Mehta R C, Marks M P, Hinks R S, Glover G H, Enzmann D R
Department of Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, CA 94305-5105, USA.
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1995 Feb;16(2):281-8.
To compare the detectability of vertebral metastatic disease on T1-weighted, short-inversion-time inversion recovery (STIR), fast spin-echo (FSE), fat-saturated FSE, and inversion recovery FSE (IRFSE) MR sequences using percent contrast and contrast-to-noise ratios.
Patients with proved metastatic disease underwent imaging on a 1.5-T MR system with sagittal T1-weighted (800/20/2 [repetition time/echo time/excitations]) (91 patients), STIR (1400/43/2; inversion time, 140) (91 patients), FSE (4000/180/2) (46 patients), fat-saturated FSE (4000/180/2) (16 patients), and IRFSE (29 patients) sequences. Percent contrast and contrast-to-noise ratio were calculated for the lesions. The number of metastatic lesions detected with each of the pulse sequences was also calculated.
Mean percent contrast was, for T1-weighted sequence, -42.2 +/- 1%; STIR, 262 +/- 34%; FSE, 121 +/- 21%; fat-saturated FSE, 182 +/- 6%; and IRFSE, 272 +/- 47%. The mean contrast-to-noise ratio for T1-weighted was -4.63 +/- 1.7; STIR, 10.8 +/- .98; FSE, 4.16 +/- .76; fat-saturated FSE, 4.87 +/- .19; and IRFSE, 5.2 +/- .87. STIR and IRFSE showed the highest number of lesions, followed by T1-weighted, fat-saturated FSE, and FSE sequences. T1-weighted sequences showed 94%, FSE 55%, and fat-saturated FSE 78% of the lesions detected. Epidural metastatic lesions were better depicted on T1-weighted, FSE, and fat-saturated FSE sequences.
STIR was superior to both T1-weighted and FSE (with and without fat saturation) for detection of metastatic lesions, in terms of both percent contrast and contrast-to-noise ratio and visibility. IRFSE was equal to STIR for the detection of metastasis by both subjective and objective criteria. T1-weighted, FSE, and fat-saturated FSE sequences were superior to STIR and IRFSE in the detection of epidural metastatic disease. IRFSE provided faster scanning time, which could be translated into greater resolution.
使用对比百分比和对比噪声比,比较T1加权、短反转时间反转恢复(STIR)、快速自旋回波(FSE)、脂肪饱和FSE及反转恢复FSE(IRFSE)磁共振序列对椎体转移瘤的检测能力。
对已确诊为转移瘤的患者,使用1.5-T磁共振系统进行矢状面T1加权(800/20/2[重复时间/回波时间/激励次数])(91例患者)、STIR(1400/43/2;反转时间,140)(91例患者)、FSE(4000/180/2)(46例患者)、脂肪饱和FSE(4000/180/2)(16例患者)及IRFSE(29例患者)序列成像。计算病变的对比百分比和对比噪声比。还计算了每个脉冲序列检测到的转移瘤数量。
T1加权序列的平均对比百分比为-42.2±1%;STIR为262±34%;FSE为121±21%;脂肪饱和FSE为182±6%;IRFSE为272±47%。T1加权的平均对比噪声比为-4.63±1.7;STIR为10.8±0.98;FSE为4.16±0.76;脂肪饱和FSE为4.87±0.19;IRFSE为5.2±0.87。STIR和IRFSE显示的病变数量最多,其次是T1加权、脂肪饱和FSE和FSE序列。T1加权序列检测到的病变占94%,FSE为55%,脂肪饱和FSE为78%。硬膜外转移瘤在T1加权、FSE和脂肪饱和FSE序列上显示更佳。
就对比百分比、对比噪声比及可见度而言,STIR在检测转移瘤方面优于T1加权和FSE(无论有无脂肪饱和)。根据主观和客观标准,IRFSE在检测转移瘤方面与STIR相当。T1加权、FSE和脂肪饱和FSE序列在检测硬膜外转移瘤方面优于STIR和IRFSE。IRFSE扫描时间更快,可转化为更高的分辨率。