Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with compressed sensing at 1.5 T: clinical application for the evaluation of branch duct IPMN of the pancreas.


Journal

European radiology
ISSN: 1432-1084
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9114774

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Nov 2020
Historique:
received: 31 03 2020
accepted: 29 05 2020
revised: 23 04 2020
pubmed: 20 6 2020
medline: 25 3 2021
entrez: 20 6 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To evaluate magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) with compressed sensing (CS) for the assessment of branch duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (BD-IPMN) of the pancreas. For this purpose, conventional navigator-triggered (NT) sampling perfection with application-optimized contrast using different flip angle evolutions (SPACE) MRCP was compared with various CS-SPACE-MRCP sequences in a clinical setting. A total of 41 patients (14 male, 27 female, mean age 68 years) underwent 1.5-T MRCP for the evaluation of BD-IPMN. The MRCP protocol consisted of the following sequences: conventional NT-SPACE-MRCP, CS-SPACE-MRCP with long (BHL, 17 s) and short single breath-hold (BHS, 8 s), and NT-CS-SPACE-MRCP. Two board-certified radiologists evaluated image quality, duct sharpness, duct visualization, lesion conspicuity, confidence, and communication with the main pancreatic duct in consensus using a 5-point scale (1-5), with higher scores indicating better quality/delineation/confidence. Maximum intensity projection reconstructions and originally acquired data were used for evaluation. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the intra-individual difference between sequences. BHS-CS-SPACE-MRCP had the highest scores for image quality (3.85 ± 0.79), duct sharpness (3.81 ± 1.05), and duct visualization (3.81 ± 1.01). There was a significant difference compared with NT-CS-SPACE-MRCP (p < 0.05) but no significant difference to the standard NT-SPACE-MRCP (p > 0.05). Concerning diagnostic quality, BHS-CS-SPACE-MRCP had the highest scores in lesion conspicuity (3.95 ± 0.92), confidence (4.12 ± 1.08), and communication (3.8 ± 1.06), significantly higher compared with NT-SPACE-MRCP, BHL-SPACE-MRCP, and NT-CS-SPACE-MRCP (p = <0.05). MRCP with CS 3D SPACE for the evaluation of BD-IPMN at 1.5 T provides the best results using a short breath-hold sequence. This approach is feasible and an excellent alternative to standard NT 3D MRCP sequences. • 1.5-T MRCP with compressed sensing for the evaluation of branch duct IPMN is a feasible method. • Short breath-hold sequences provide the best results for this purpose.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32556465
doi: 10.1007/s00330-020-06996-2
pii: 10.1007/s00330-020-06996-2
pmc: PMC7554004
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

6014-6021

Références

Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2008 Aug;16(3):453-66, v
pubmed: 18585598
Pancreatology. 2017 Sep - Oct;17(5):738-753
pubmed: 28735806
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018 Nov;48(5):1389-1399
pubmed: 29656611
Magn Reson Med. 2007 Dec;58(6):1182-95
pubmed: 17969013
Oncol Lett. 2015 Apr;9(4):1917-1921
pubmed: 25789068
Invest Radiol. 2018 Nov;53(11):681-688
pubmed: 29889672
Radiology. 2016 Aug;280(2):585-94
pubmed: 26982678
Eur J Radiol. 2020 Jan;122:108765
pubmed: 31830630
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008 Sep;28(3):685-90
pubmed: 18777552
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2019 May;44(5):1766-1772
pubmed: 30659308
Radiol Clin North Am. 2014 Jul;52(4):757-77
pubmed: 24889170
Eur J Radiol. 2018 May;102:74-82
pubmed: 29685548
J Am Coll Radiol. 2017 Jul;14(7):911-923
pubmed: 28533111
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2017 Nov;46(5):1289-1297
pubmed: 28295827
Radiology. 2006 Feb;238(2):549-59
pubmed: 16436816
Invest Radiol. 2018 Mar;53(3):150-157
pubmed: 28976478
Invest Radiol. 2017 Oct;52(10):612-619
pubmed: 28448309
Magn Reson Imaging. 2018 Oct;52:131-136
pubmed: 29859947
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2009 May-Jun;33(3):363-8
pubmed: 19478628
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014 Sep;7(9):882-92
pubmed: 25129517
Radiology. 2015 Mar;274(3):723-33
pubmed: 25302831
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2018 Sep;43(9):2255-2261
pubmed: 29302736

Auteurs

Benjamin Henninger (B)

Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. benjamin.henninger@i-med.ac.at.

Michael Steurer (M)

Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.

Michaela Plaikner (M)

Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.

Elisabeth Weiland (E)

Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Henkestraße 127, 91052, Erlangen, Germany.

Werner Jaschke (W)

Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.

Christian Kremser (C)

Department of Radiology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH