著者

Azusa Sakurama Yasutaka Fushimi Satoshi Nakajima Akihiko Sakata Takuya Hinoda Sonoko Oshima Sayo Otani Krishna Pandu Wicaksono Wei Liu Takakuni Maki Tomohisa Okada Ryosuke Takahashi Yuji Nakamoto

出版者

Japanese Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

雑誌

Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences (ISSN:13473182)

巻号頁・発行日

pp.mp.2021-0065, (Released:2021-10-01)

参考文献数

40

---

Purpose: To compare reliability and elucidate clinical application of magnetization-prepared rapid gradient-echo (MPRAGE) with 9-fold acceleration by using wave-controlled aliasing in parallel imaging (Wave-CAIPI 3 × 3) in comparison to conventional MPRAGE accelerated by using generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisition (GRAPPA) 2 × 1.Methods: A total of 26 healthy volunteers and 33 patients were included in this study. Subjects were scanned with two MPRAGEs, GRAPPA 2 × 1 and Wave-CAIPI 3 × 3 acquired in 5 min 21 s and 1 min 42 s, respectively, on a 3T MR scanner. Healthy volunteers underwent additional two MPRAGEs (CAIPI 3 × 3 and GRAPPA 3 × 3). The image quality of the four MPRAGEs was visually evaluated with a 5-point scale in healthy volunteers, and the SNR of four MPRAGEs was also calculated by measuring the phantom 10 times with each MPRAGE. Based on the results of the visual evaluation, voxel-based morphometry (VBM) analyses, including subfield analysis, were performed only for GRAPPA 2 × 1 and Wave-CAIPI 3 × 3. Correlation of segmentation results between GRAPPA 2 × 1 and Wave-CAIPI 3 × 3 was assessed.Results: In visual evaluations, scores for MPRAGE GRAPPA 2 × 1 (mean rank: 4.00) were significantly better than those for Wave-CAIPI 3 × 3 (mean rank: 3.00), CAIPI 3 × 3 (mean rank: 1.83), and GRAPPA 3 × 3 (mean rank: 1.17), and scores for Wave-CAIPI 3×3 were significantly better than those for CAIPI 3 × 3 and GRAPPA 3 × 3. Image noise was evident at the center for additional MPRAGE CAIPI 3 × 3 and GRAPPA 3 × 3. The correlation of segmentation results between GRAPPA 2 × 1 and Wave-CAIPI 3 × 3 was higher than 0.85 in all VOIs except globus pallidus. Subfield analysis of hippocampus also showed a high correlation between GRAPPA 2 × 1 and Wave-CAIPI 3 × 3.Conclusion: MPRAGE Wave-CAIPI 3 × 3 shows relatively better contrast, despite of its short scan time of 1 min 42 s. The volumes derived from automated segmentation of MPRAGE Wave-CAIPI are considered to be reliable measures.

著者

Satoshi Otani Aki Kido Yuki Himoto Akihiko Sakata Tomoaki Otani Ryo Kuwahara Yusaku Moribata Naoko Nishio Ryo Yajima Kyoko Nakao Yasuhisa Kurata Sachiko Minamiguchi Masaki Mandai Yuji Nakamoto

出版者

Japanese Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

雑誌

Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences (ISSN:13473182)

巻号頁・発行日

pp.mp.2021-0003, (Released:2021-09-03)

参考文献数

26

被引用文献数

4

---

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic performance of dynamic contrast-enhanced-MR (DCE-MR) and delayed contrast-enhanced (CE)-MRI added to unenhanced MRI, including diffusion weighted image (DWI) for differentiating malignant adnexal tumors, conducting a retrospective blinded image interpretation study.Methods: Data of 80 patients suspected of having adnexal tumors by ultrasonography between April 2008 and August 2018 were used for the study. All patients had undergone preoperative MRI and surgical resection at our institution. Four radiologists (two specialized in gynecological radiology and two non-specialized) were enrolled for blinded review of the MR images. A 3-point scale was used: 0 = benign, 1 = indeterminate, and 2 = malignant. Three imaging sets were reviewed: Set A, unenhanced MRI including DWI; Set B, Set A and delayed CE-T1WI; and Set C, Set A and DCE-MRI. Imaging criteria for benign and malignant tumors were given in earlier reports. The diagnostic performance of the three imaging sets of the four readers was calculated. Their areas under the curve (AUCs) were compared using the DeLong method.Results: Accuracies of Set B were 81%–88%. Those of Set C were 81%–85%. The AUCs of Set B were 0.83 and 0.89. Those of Set C were 0.81–0.86. For two readers, Set A showed lower accuracy and AUC than Set B/Set C (less than 0.80), although those were equivalent in other readers. No significant difference in AUCs was found among the three sequence sets. Intrareader agreement was moderate to almost perfect in Sets A and B, and substantial to almost perfect in Set C.Conclusion: DCE-MR showed no superiority for differentiating malignant adnexal tumors from benign tumors compared to delayed CE-T1WI with conventional MR and DWI.