Spiral T1 Spin-Echo for Routine Postcontrast Brain MRI Exams: A Multicenter Multireader Clinical Evaluation.
Journal
AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology
ISSN: 1936-959X
Titre abrégé: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8003708
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2020
02 2020
Historique:
received:
21
10
2019
accepted:
10
12
2019
pubmed:
8
2
2020
medline:
22
9
2020
entrez:
8
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Spiral MR imaging has several advantages compared with Cartesian MR imaging that can be leveraged for added clinical value. A multicenter multireader study was designed to compare spiral with standard-of-care Cartesian postcontrast structural brain MR imaging on the basis of relative performance in 10 metrics of image quality, artifact prevalence, and diagnostic benefit. Seven clinical sites acquired 88 total subjects. For each subject, sites acquired 2 postcontrast MR imaging scans: a spiral 2D T1 spin-echo, and 1 of 4 routine Cartesian 2D T1 spin-echo/TSE scans (fully sampled spin-echo at 3T, 1.5T, partial Fourier, TSE). The spiral acquisition matched the Cartesian scan for scan time, geometry, and contrast. Nine neuroradiologists independently reviewed each subject, with the matching pair of spiral and Cartesian scans compared side-by-side, and scored on 10 image-quality metrics (5-point Likert scale) focused on intracranial assessment. The Wilcoxon signed rank test evaluated relative performance of spiral versus Cartesian, while the Kruskal-Wallis test assessed interprotocol differences. Spiral was superior to Cartesian in 7 of 10 metrics (flow artifact mitigation, SNR, GM/WM contrast, image sharpness, lesion conspicuity, preference for diagnosing abnormal enhancement, and overall intracranial image quality), comparable in 1 of 10 metrics (motion artifacts), and inferior in 2 of 10 metrics (susceptibility artifacts, overall extracranial image quality) related to magnetic susceptibility ( Spiral 2D T1 spin-echo for routine structural brain MR imaging is feasible in the clinic with conventional scanners and was preferred by neuroradiologists for overall postcontrast intracranial evaluation.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Spiral MR imaging has several advantages compared with Cartesian MR imaging that can be leveraged for added clinical value. A multicenter multireader study was designed to compare spiral with standard-of-care Cartesian postcontrast structural brain MR imaging on the basis of relative performance in 10 metrics of image quality, artifact prevalence, and diagnostic benefit.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Seven clinical sites acquired 88 total subjects. For each subject, sites acquired 2 postcontrast MR imaging scans: a spiral 2D T1 spin-echo, and 1 of 4 routine Cartesian 2D T1 spin-echo/TSE scans (fully sampled spin-echo at 3T, 1.5T, partial Fourier, TSE). The spiral acquisition matched the Cartesian scan for scan time, geometry, and contrast. Nine neuroradiologists independently reviewed each subject, with the matching pair of spiral and Cartesian scans compared side-by-side, and scored on 10 image-quality metrics (5-point Likert scale) focused on intracranial assessment. The Wilcoxon signed rank test evaluated relative performance of spiral versus Cartesian, while the Kruskal-Wallis test assessed interprotocol differences.
RESULTS
Spiral was superior to Cartesian in 7 of 10 metrics (flow artifact mitigation, SNR, GM/WM contrast, image sharpness, lesion conspicuity, preference for diagnosing abnormal enhancement, and overall intracranial image quality), comparable in 1 of 10 metrics (motion artifacts), and inferior in 2 of 10 metrics (susceptibility artifacts, overall extracranial image quality) related to magnetic susceptibility (
CONCLUSIONS
Spiral 2D T1 spin-echo for routine structural brain MR imaging is feasible in the clinic with conventional scanners and was preferred by neuroradiologists for overall postcontrast intracranial evaluation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32029467
pii: ajnr.A6409
doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A6409
pmc: PMC7015195
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
238-245Informations de copyright
© 2020 by American Journal of Neuroradiology.
Références
Magn Reson Med. 2017 Jan;77(1):83-91
pubmed: 27770473
Magn Reson Med. 1999 Feb;41(2):417-22
pubmed: 10080293
Magn Reson Med. 2004 Dec;52(6):1388-96
pubmed: 15562493
Magn Reson Med. 1997 Jun;37(6):906-13
pubmed: 9178243
Neuroimage. 2012 Aug 15;62(2):706-12
pubmed: 22036995
Magn Reson Med. 2019 Apr;81(4):2501-2513
pubmed: 30444004
Magn Reson Med. 2014 Jan;71(1):278-85
pubmed: 23440770
Magn Reson Med. 1992 Dec;28(2):202-13
pubmed: 1461123
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2016 Jan;43(1):28-44
pubmed: 26174802
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1986;5(1):2-7
pubmed: 18243976
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2016 Apr;37(4):642-7
pubmed: 26611994
Magn Reson Med. 2018 Jun;79(6):3218-3228
pubmed: 28983966
Magn Reson Med. 1995 Apr;33(4):549-56
pubmed: 7776887
Magn Reson Med. 2016 Jan;75(1):266-73
pubmed: 25754947