Diffusion Tensor Imaging of the Brachial Plexus: A Comparison between Readout-segmented and Conventional Single-shot Echo-planar Imaging.
Adult
Anisotropy
Artifacts
Brachial Plexus
/ diagnostic imaging
Contrast Media
Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Diffusion Tensor Imaging
Echo-Planar Imaging
Female
Healthy Volunteers
Humans
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
/ methods
Male
Neuroimaging
/ methods
Prospective Studies
Reproducibility of Results
Signal-To-Noise Ratio
brachial plexus
diffusion tensor imaging peripheral nerves
diffusion-weighted imaging
medical representative
neurography
Journal
Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
ISSN: 1880-2206
Titre abrégé: Magn Reson Med Sci
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 101153368
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Apr 2019
10 Apr 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
13
11
2018
medline:
18
6
2019
entrez:
13
11
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) adds functional information to morphological magnetic resonance neurography (MRN) in the assessment of the brachial nerve plexus. To determine the most appropriate pulse sequence in scan times suited for diagnostic imaging in clinical routine, we compared image quality between simultaneous multi-slice readout-segmented (rs-DTI) and conventional single-shot (ss-DTI) echo-planar imaging techniques. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved study including 10 healthy volunteers. The supraclavicular brachial plexus, covering the nerve roots and trunks from C5 to C7, was imaged on both sides with rs-DTI and ss-DTI. Both sequences were acquired in scan times <7 min with b-values of 900 s/mm In rs-DTI image, the overall quality was significantly better and distortion artifacts were significantly lower (P = 0.001-0.002 and P = 0.001-0.002, respectively) for both readers. In ss-DTI, a trend toward lower degree of ghosting and motion artifacts was elicited (reader 1, P = 0.121; reader 2, P = 0.264). No significant differences between the two DTI techniques were found for signal-to-noise ratios (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) and fractional anisotropy (FA) (P ≥ 0.475, P ≥ 0.624, and P ≥ 0.169, respectively). Interreader agreement for all examined parameters and all sequences ranged from intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.064 to 0.905 and Kappa 0.40 to 0.851. Incomparable acquisition times rs-DTI showed higher image quality and less distortion artifacts than ss-DTI. The trend toward a higher degree of ghosting and motion artifacts in rs-DTI did not deteriorate image quality to a significant degree. Thus, rs-DTI should be considered for functional MRN of the brachial plexus.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30416178
doi: 10.2463/mrms.mp.2018-0004
pmc: PMC6460122
doi:
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
150-157Références
Magn Reson Med. 2009 Aug;62(2):468-75
pubmed: 19449372
Magn Reson Imaging. 2010 Jan;28(1):70-6
pubmed: 19577395
J Neurosurg. 2010 Feb;112(2):362-71
pubmed: 19663545
Magn Reson Med. 2009 Dec;62(6):1629-40
pubmed: 19859974
Neuroradiology. 2010 Mar;52(3):237-45
pubmed: 20054685
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011 Aug;32(7):1274-9
pubmed: 21596809
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011 Nov-Dec;32(10):1824-9
pubmed: 21920866
Neuroimage. 2012 Feb 1;59(3):2393-400
pubmed: 21945470
Skeletal Radiol. 2012 Aug;41(8):971-80
pubmed: 22048666
Eur J Radiol. 2012 Oct;81(10):2666-72
pubmed: 22071340
Eur J Radiol. 2012 Jul;81(7):e775-82
pubmed: 22521944
Radiology. 2012 Oct;265(1):194-203
pubmed: 22820733
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2013 Mar;34(3):486-97
pubmed: 22976233
Invest Radiol. 2013 Feb;48(2):104-12
pubmed: 23249645
Acta Radiol. 2013 Apr 1;54(3):299-306
pubmed: 23319722
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013 Feb;200(2):437-41
pubmed: 23345368
Eur J Radiol. 2013 Oct;82(10):e590-6
pubmed: 23768611
Diagn Interv Imaging. 2014 Jan;95(1):63-8
pubmed: 24161286
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014 Jun;39(6):1374-83
pubmed: 24243801
Acad Radiol. 2014 Mar;21(3):338-44
pubmed: 24361075
Acad Radiol. 2014 Apr;21(4):531-7
pubmed: 24594423
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015 Jan;36(1):202-9
pubmed: 25300985
Magn Reson Med Sci. 2015;14(2):145-52
pubmed: 25500780
Eur J Radiol. 2015 May;84(5):927-32
pubmed: 25740699
Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2015 Apr;19(2):137-48
pubmed: 25764238
Cancer Imaging. 2015 May 02;15:6
pubmed: 25934632
Invest Radiol. 2015 Nov;50(11):785-91
pubmed: 26146870
Eur Radiol. 2016 Jun;26(6):1921-8
pubmed: 26373759
Eur Radiol. 2016 May;26(5):1235-44
pubmed: 26396110
Eur J Radiol. 2016 Jan;85(1):274-278
pubmed: 26547123
Invest Radiol. 2016 Aug;51(8):499-504
pubmed: 26895194
Invest Radiol. 2017 Aug;52(8):482-487
pubmed: 28291025
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571