Cited 0 times in
Feasibility of free-breathing dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the abdomen: a comparison between CAIPIRINHA-VIBE, Radial-VIBE with KWIC reconstruction and conventional VIBE
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Seo, N | - |
dc.contributor.author | Park, SJ | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kim, B | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lee, CK | - |
dc.contributor.author | Huh, J | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kim, JK | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lee, SS | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kim, IS | - |
dc.contributor.author | Nickel, D | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kim, KW | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-05-04T00:24:55Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2018-05-04T00:24:55Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2016 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0007-1285 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://repository.ajou.ac.kr/handle/201003/14928 | - |
dc.description.abstract | OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibilities of controlled aliasing in parallel imaging results in higher acceleration with volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination (CAIPIRINHA-VIBE), radial acquisition of VIBE (Radial-VIBE) with k-space-weighted image contrast (KWIC) reconstruction (KWIC-Radial-VIBE) and conventional-VIBE (c-VIBE) for free-breathing dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI of the abdomen. METHODS: 23 prospectively enrolled patients underwent DCE-MRI of the abdomen with CAIPIRINHA-VIBE (n = 10), KWIC-Radial-VIBE (n = 6) or c-VIBE (n = 7). Qualitative image quality of the DCE-MR images and perfusion maps was independently scored by two abdominal radiologists using a 5-point scale (from 1, uninterpretable, to 5, very good). For quantitative analysis, the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the liver and goodness-of-fit (GOF) of the time-intensity curve were measured. RESULTS: In the three tested sequences, DCE-MRI had good temporal (5 s) and spatial resolution (1.48 x 1.48 x 4 mm/voxel). Interobserver agreement in the qualitative analysis was good (k = 0.753: 95% confidence interval, 0.610-0.895). Therefore, the mean scores were used in the data analysis. Overall image quality was comparable between CAIPIRINHA-VIBE (3.52 +/- 0.55) and KWIC-Radial-VIBE (3.72 +/- 0.37: p = 1.000), and both were significantly better than c-VIBE (2.71 +/- 0.34: p < 0.001). Perfusion map quality score was highest with KWIC-Radial-VIBE (4.33 +/- 0.65), followed by CAIPIRINHA-VIBE (3.70 +/- 0.73) and c-VIBE (3.14 +/- 0.66), but without statistical significance between CAIPIRINHA-VIBE and KWIC-Radial-VIBE (p = 0.167). The SNR of the liver and GOF of the time-intensity curve did not significantly differ between the three sequences (p = 0.116 and 0.224, respectively). CONCLUSION: CAIPIRINHA-VIBE and KWIC-Radial-VIBE provide comparably better performance than c-VIBE. Both can be feasible sequences with acceptable good image quality for free-breathing DCE-MRI. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: CAIPIRINHA-VIBE and KWIC-Radial-VIBE provide comparably better quality of free-breathing DCE-MRIs than c-VIBE. | - |
dc.language.iso | en | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Abdomen | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Contrast Media | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Feasibility Studies | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Female | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Humans | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Image Enhancement | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Male | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Middle Aged | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Prospective Studies | - |
dc.subject.MESH | Signal-To-Noise Ratio | - |
dc.title | Feasibility of free-breathing dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the abdomen: a comparison between CAIPIRINHA-VIBE, Radial-VIBE with KWIC reconstruction and conventional VIBE | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 27504684 | - |
dc.identifier.url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5124798/ | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 김, 보현 | - |
dc.type.local | Journal Papers | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1259/bjr.20160150 | - |
dc.citation.title | The British journal of radiology | - |
dc.citation.volume | 89 | - |
dc.citation.number | 1066 | - |
dc.citation.date | 2016 | - |
dc.citation.startPage | 20160150 | - |
dc.citation.endPage | 20160150 | - |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | The British journal of radiology, 89(1066). : 20160150-20160150, 2016 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1748-880X | - |
dc.relation.journalid | J000071285 | - |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.