Comparisons between image quality and diagnostic performance of 2D- and breath-hold 3D magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 3T.
Cholangiography, three-dimensional
Data compression
Magnetic resonance imaging
Two-dimensional
Journal
European radiology
ISSN: 1432-1084
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9114774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2021
Nov 2021
Historique:
received:
29
12
2020
accepted:
31
03
2021
revised:
10
03
2021
pubmed:
23
4
2021
medline:
21
10
2021
entrez:
22
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare the image quality and diagnostic performance of 2D MRCP to those of breath-hold 3D MRCP using compressed sensing (CS-MRCP) and gradient and spin-echo (GRASE-MRCP) at 3T. From January to November 2018, patients who underwent pancreatobiliary MRI including 2D MRCP and two breath-hold 3D MRCP using CS and GRASE at 3T were included. Three radiologists independently evaluated image quality, motion artifact, and pancreatic cyst conspicuity. Diagnostic performance was assessed for bile duct anatomic variation, bile duct, and pancreatic diseases using a composite algorithm as reference standards. Pancreatic lesion detectability and conspicuity were evaluated using JAFROC and generalized estimating equation analysis. One hundred patients (male = 50) were included. Bile duct anatomic variation, bile duct and pancreatic diseases were present in respectively 31, 15, and 79 patients. Breath-hold 3D MRCP provided better image quality than 2D MRCP (3.5 ± 0.6 in 2D MRCP; 4.0 ± 0.7 in GRASE-MRCP and 3.9 ± 0.8 in CS-MRCP, p < 0.001 for both). There was no difference in motion artifact between 2D and breath-hold 3D MRCP (p = 0.1). Breath-hold 3D CS-MRCP provided better pancreatic cyst conspicuity than 2D MRCP (2.7 [95% CI: 2.5-3.0] vs. 2.3 [95% CI: 2.1-2.5], p = 0.001). There were no significant differences between the diagnostic performance of the three sequences in the detection of bile duct anatomic variation or pancreatic lesions (p > 0.05). Breath-hold 3D MRCP with GRASE or CS can provide better image quality than 2D MRCP in a comparable scan time. • Breath-hold 3D MRCP using compressed sensing (CS) or gradient and spin-echo (GRASE) provided a better image quality with less image blurring than 2D MRCP. • There were no significant differences between 2D MRCP and breath-hold 3D MRCP in either motion artifact or the number of non-diagnostic exams. • There were no significant differences between 2D MRCP and either type of breath-hold 3D MRCP in the diagnosis of bile duct anatomic variation or detection of pancreatic lesions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33884471
doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-07968-w
pii: 10.1007/s00330-021-07968-w
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
8399-8407Subventions
Organisme : Seoul National University Hospital
ID : 04-2018-0650
Informations de copyright
© 2021. European Society of Radiology.
Références
Anupindi SA, Victoria T (2008) Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: techniques and applications. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 16:453–466, v
doi: 10.1016/j.mric.2008.04.005
Coakley FV, Schwartz LH (1999) Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. J Magn Reson Imaging 9:157–162
doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1522-2586(199902)9:2<157::AID-JMRI2>3.0.CO;2-N
Cai L, Yeh BM, Westphalen AC, Roberts J, Wang ZJ (2017) 3D T2-weighted and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced 3D T1-weighted MR cholangiography for evaluation of biliary anatomy in living liver donors. Abdom Radiol (NY) 42:842–850
doi: 10.1007/s00261-016-0936-z
Nakaura T, Kidoh M, Maruyama N et al (2013) Usefulness of the SPACE pulse sequence at 1.5T MR cholangiography: comparison of image quality and image acquisition time with conventional 3D-TSE sequence. J Magn Reson Imaging 38:1014–1019
doi: 10.1002/jmri.24033
Chandarana H, Doshi AM, Shanbhogue A et al (2016) Three-dimensional MR cholangiopancreatography in a breath hold with sparsity-based reconstruction of highly undersampled data. Radiology 280:585–594
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016151935
Zhu L, Xue H, Sun Z et al (2018) Modified breath-hold compressed-sensing 3D MR cholangiopancreatography with a small field-of-view and high resolution acquisition: clinical feasibility in biliary and pancreatic disorders. J Magn Reson Imaging 48:1389–1399
doi: 10.1002/jmri.26049
Mannes I, Dallongeville A, Badat N, Beaussier H, Chatellier G, Zins M (2020) Breath-hold compressed-sensing 3D MR cholangiopancreatography compared to free-breathing 3D MR cholangiopancreatography: prospective study of image quality and diagnostic performance in pancreatic disorders. Abdom Radiol (NY) 45:1082–1091
doi: 10.1007/s00261-019-02254-2
Glockner JF, Saranathan M, Bayram E, Lee CU (2013) Breath-held MR cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) using a 3D Dixon fat-water separated balanced steady state free precession sequence. Magn Reson Imaging 31:1263–1270
doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2013.06.008
Wielopolski PA, Gaa J, Wielopolski DR, Oudkerk M (1999) Breath-hold MR cholangiopancreatography with three-dimensional, segmented, echo-planar imaging and volume rendering. Radiology 210:247–252
doi: 10.1148/radiology.210.1.r99ja05247
Morita S, Ueno E, Masukawa A, Suzuki K, Machida H, Fujimura M (2009) Defining juxtapapillary diverticulum with 3D segmented trueFISP MRCP: comparison with conventional MRCP sequences with an oral negative contrast agent. Jpn J Radiol 27:423–429
doi: 10.1007/s11604-009-0365-9
Zins M (2018) Breath-holding 3D MRCP: the time is now? Eur Radiol 28:3719–3720
doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5550-8
Nam JG, Lee JM, Kang HJ et al (2018) GRASE revisited: breath-hold three-dimensional (3D) magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography using a gradient and spin echo (GRASE) technique at 3T. Eur Radiol 28:3721–3728
doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-5275-0
Yoshida M, Nakaura T, Inoue T et al (2018) Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with GRASE sequence at 3.0T: does it improve image quality and acquisition time as compared with 3D TSE? Eur Radiol 28:2436–2443
doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-5240-y
Lohofer FK, Kaissis GA, Rasper M et al (2019) Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 3 Tesla: image quality comparison between 3D compressed sensing and 2D single-shot acquisitions. Eur J Radiol 115:53–58
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.04.002
Koo TK, Li MY (2016) A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 15:155–163
doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
Sodickson A, Mortele KJ, Barish MA, Zou KH, Thibodeau S, Tempany CM (2006) Three-dimensional fast-recovery fast spin-echo MRCP: comparison with two-dimensional single-shot fast spin-echo techniques. Radiology 238:549–559
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2382032065
Yoon LS, Catalano OA, Fritz S, Ferrone CR, Hahn PF, Sahani DV (2009) Another dimension in magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: comparison of 2- and 3-dimensional magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for the evaluation of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm of the pancreas. J Comput Assist Tomogr 33:363–368
doi: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e3181852193
Kim JH, Hong SS, Eun HW, Han JK, Choi BI (2012) Clinical usefulness of free-breathing navigator-triggered 3D MRCP in non-cooperative patients: comparison with conventional breath-hold 2D MRCP. Eur J Radiol 81:e513–e518
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.06.004
Liu K, Xie P, Peng W, Zhou Z (2015) Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: comparison of two- and three-dimensional sequences for the assessment of pancreatic cystic lesions. Oncol Lett 9:1917–1921
doi: 10.3892/ol.2015.2935
Chien CP, Chiu FM, Shen YC, Chen YH, Chung HW (2020) Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 3T in a single breath-hold: comparative effectiveness between three-dimensional (3D) gradient- and spin-echo and two-dimensional (2D) thick-slab fast spin-echo acquisitions. Quant Imaging Med Surg 10:1265–1274
doi: 10.21037/qims.2020.04.14
Yoon JH, Lee SM, Kang HJ et al (2017) Clinical feasibility of 3-dimensional magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography using compressed sensing: comparison of image quality and diagnostic performance. Invest Radiol 52:612–619
doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000380
Fellner F, Held P, Fellner C, Schmitt R, Obletter N (1997) Fast spin-echo (FSE) and gradient- and spin-echo (GRASE) in fast MRI of the pelvis. Magn Reson Imaging 15:517–524
doi: 10.1016/S0730-725X(97)00003-9
Feinberg DA, Johnson G, Kiefer B (1995) Increased flexibility in GRASE imaging by k space-banded phase encoding. Magn Reson Med 34:149–155
doi: 10.1002/mrm.1910340204
Feinberg DA, Kiefer B, Johnson G (1995) GRASE improves spatial resolution in single shot imaging. Magn Reson Med 33:529–533
doi: 10.1002/mrm.1910330411
Fellner F, Schmitt R, Trenkler J, Fellner C, Bohm-Jurkovic H (1995) Turbo gradient-spin-echo (GRASE): first clinical experiences with a fast T2-weighted sequence in MRI of the brain. Eur J Radiol 19:171–176
doi: 10.1016/0720-048X(94)00598-7
Yoon JH, Lee JM, Yu MH et al (2018) Evaluation of transient motion during gadoxetic acid-enhanced multiphasic liver magnetic resonance imaging using free-breathing golden-angle radial sparse parallel magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 53:52–61
doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000409
Yoon JH, Nickel MD, Peeters JM, Lee JM (2019) Rapid imaging: recent advances in abdominal MRI for reducing acquisition time and its clinical applications. Korean J Radiol 20:1597–1615
doi: 10.3348/kjr.2018.0931
Yoon JH, Yu MH, Chang W et al (2017) Clinical feasibility of free-breathing dynamic T1-weighted imaging with gadoxetic acid-enhanced liver magnetic resonance imaging using a combination of variable density sampling and compressed sensing. Invest Radiol 52:596–604
doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000385
Donoho DL (2006) Compressed sensing. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 52:1289–1306
doi: 10.1109/TIT.2006.871582
He M, Xu J, Sun Z et al (2020) Comparison and evaluation of the efficacy of compressed SENSE (CS) and gradient- and spin-echo (GRASE) in breath-hold (BH) magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP). J Magn Reson Imaging 51:824–832
doi: 10.1002/jmri.26863
Taron J, Weiss J, Notohamiprodjo M et al (2018) Acceleration of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography using compressed sensing at 1.5 and 3 T: a clinical feasibility study. Invest Radiol 53:681–688
doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000489