BREATH-HOLD T2-WEIGHTED SEQUENCES OF THE LIVER - A COMPARISON OF 4 TECHNIQUES AT 1.0-T AND 1.5-T

被引：15

作者：

SIMM, FC ^{[1
]}

SEMELKA, RC ^{[1
]}

RECHT, M ^{[1
]}

DEIMLING, M ^{[1
]}

LENZ, G ^{[1
]}

LAUB, GA ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] SIEMENS AG,MED ENGN GRP,W-8520 ERLANGEN,GERMANY

来源：

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING | 1992年 / 10卷 / 01期

关键词：

LIVER MRI; MOTION ARTIFACTS; FAST SCANNING;

D O I：

10.1016/0730-725X(92)90371-6

中图分类号：

R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];

学科分类号：

1002 [临床医学]; 100207 [影像医学与核医学]; 1009 [特种医学];

摘要：

T2-weighted images are considered the most sensitive for lesion detection at high field; however, long imaging time is problematic. Accordingly, the authors compared four breath-hold T2 or T2* weighted sequences comprising T2*-weighted FLASH, T2*-weighted PSIF, T2-weighted rapid spin echo (RASE), and T2-weighted Turbo-FLASH (Turbo) in 20 different healthy volunteers, 10 at 1.0 T and 10 at 1.5 T with reference to regular T2-weighted spin echo. Images were evaluated quantitatively by liver signal to noise (S/N) and spleen-liver signal difference to noise (SD/N) ratios and qualitatively for presence of artifacts and image quality. Data were evaluated for 1.0 T and 1.5 T separately and combined. In the combined evaluation, T2*-FLASH had good S/N (23.1 + 5.1) but low SD/N (2.9 + 1.7) and suffered from susceptibility artifacts. T2. PSIF had good S/N (28.1 + 10.0) and moderate SD/N (6.0 + 2.4), but occasionally had heterogeneous signal intensity. Flow signal void was an attractive feature. T2 RASE had very low S/N (4.4 + 1.9) and low SD/N (2.3 + 1.1) and suffered from flow artifacts. T2-Turbo had good S/N (24.6 + 8.6) and SD/N (8.9 + 2.5). Flow signal void was present, but small matrix size decreased image quality. The results of our study suggest that T2*-PSIF and T2-Turbo have good S/N and SD/N and fair image quality which may be clinically useful for breath-hold T2-weighted sequences of the liver.

引用

页码：41 / 47

页数：7

共 15 条

[1]

Foley, Kneeland, Cates, Kellman, Lawson, Middleton, Hendrick, Contrast optimization for the detection of focal hepatic lesions by MR imaging at 1.5 T, Am. J. Roentgen, 149, pp. 1155-1160, (1987)

[2]

Reinig, Dwyer, Miller, Fran, Adams, Chang, Liver metastases: Detection with MR imaging at 0.5 and 1.5 T, Radiology, 170, pp. 149-153, (1989)

[3]

Unger, Cohen, Gantenby, Clair, Brown, Nelson, McGlone, Single breath-holding scans of the abdomen using FISP and FLASH at 1.5 T, J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr., 12, pp. 575-583, (1988)

[4]

Edelman, Wallner, Singer, Atkinson, Saini, Segmented TurboFLASH: Method for breath-hold MR imaging of the liver with flexible contrast, Radiology, 177, pp. 515-521, (1990)

[5]

Edelman, Siegel, Singer, Dupuis, Longmaid, Dynamic MR imaging of the liver with Gd-DTPA: Initial clinical results, Am. J. Roentgenol., 153, pp. 1213-1219, (1989)

[6]

Hamm, Fischer, Taupitz, Differentiation of hepatic hemangiomas from metastasis by dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging, J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr., 14, pp. 205-216, (1990)

[7]

Hendrich, Haase, Matthaei, 3D-SNAPSHOT FLASH NMR imaging of the human heart, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 8, pp. 377-382, (1990)

[8]

Mugler, Brookeman, Three-dimensional magnetization-prepared rapid gradient-echo imaging (3D MP RAGE), Magn. Reson. Med., 15, pp. 152-157, (1990)

[9]

Mitchell, Vinitski, Burk, Levy, Rifkin, Motion artifact reduction in MR imaging of the abdomen: Gradient moment nulling versus respiratory-sorted phase encoding, Radiology, 169, pp. 155-160, (1988)

[10]

Tkach, Haacke, A comparison of fast spin echo and gradient field echo sequences, Magn. Reson. Imag., 6, pp. 373-389, (1988)

← 1 2 →