Cargando…
Coronary MR angiography at 3T: fat suppression versus water-fat separation
OBJECTIVES: To compare Dixon water-fat suppression with spectral pre-saturation with inversion recovery (SPIR) at 3T for coronary magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) and to demonstrate the feasibility of fat suppressed coronary MRA at 3T without administration of a contrast agent. MATERIALS AND MET...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5033991/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27038934 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10334-016-0550-7 |
_version_ | 1782455200852738048 |
---|---|
author | Nezafat, Maryam Henningsson, Markus Ripley, David P. Dedieu, Nathalie Greil, Gerald Greenwood, John P. Börnert, Peter Plein, Sven Botnar, René M. |
author_facet | Nezafat, Maryam Henningsson, Markus Ripley, David P. Dedieu, Nathalie Greil, Gerald Greenwood, John P. Börnert, Peter Plein, Sven Botnar, René M. |
author_sort | Nezafat, Maryam |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To compare Dixon water-fat suppression with spectral pre-saturation with inversion recovery (SPIR) at 3T for coronary magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) and to demonstrate the feasibility of fat suppressed coronary MRA at 3T without administration of a contrast agent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Coronary MRA with Dixon water-fat separation or with SPIR fat suppression was compared on a 3T scanner equipped with a 32-channel cardiac receiver coil. Eight healthy volunteers were examined. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), right coronary artery (RCA), and left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery sharpness and length were measured and statistically compared. Two experienced cardiologists graded the visual image quality of reformatted Dixon and SPIR images (1: poor quality to 5: excellent quality). RESULTS: Coronary MRA images in healthy volunteers showed improved contrast with the Dixon technique compared to SPIR (CNR (blood-fat): Dixon = 14.9 ± 2.9 and SPIR = 13.9 ± 2.1; p = 0.08, CNR (blood-myocardium): Dixon = 10.2 ± 2.7 and SPIR = 9.11 ± 2.6; p = 0.1). The Dixon method led to similar fat suppression (fat SNR with Dixon: 2.1 ± 0.5 vs. SPIR: 2.4 ± 1.2, p = 0.3), but resulted in significantly increased SNR of blood (blood SNR with Dixon: 19.9 ± 4.5 vs. SPIR: 15.5 ± 3.1, p < 0.05). This means the residual fat signal is slightly lower with the Dixon compared to the SIPR technique (although not significant), while the SNR of blood is significantly higher with the Dixon technique. Vessel sharpness of the RCA was similar for Dixon and SPIR (57 ± 7 % vs. 56 ± 9 %, p = 0.2), while the RCA visualized vessel length was increased compared to SPIR fat suppression (107 ± 21 vs. 101 ± 21 mm, p < 0.001). For the LAD, vessel sharpness (50 ± 13 % vs. 50 ± 7 %, p = 0.4) and vessel length (92 ± 46 vs. 90 ± 47 mm, p = 0.4) were similar with both techniques. Consequently, the Dixon technique resulted in an improved visual score of the coronary arteries in the water fat separated images of healthy subjects (RCA: 4.6 ± 0.5 vs. 4.1 ± 0.7, p = 0.01, LAD: 4.1 ± 0.7 vs. 3.5 ± 0.8, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Dixon water-fat separation can significantly improve coronary artery image quality without the use of a contrast agent at 3T. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5033991 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-50339912016-10-09 Coronary MR angiography at 3T: fat suppression versus water-fat separation Nezafat, Maryam Henningsson, Markus Ripley, David P. Dedieu, Nathalie Greil, Gerald Greenwood, John P. Börnert, Peter Plein, Sven Botnar, René M. MAGMA Research Article OBJECTIVES: To compare Dixon water-fat suppression with spectral pre-saturation with inversion recovery (SPIR) at 3T for coronary magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) and to demonstrate the feasibility of fat suppressed coronary MRA at 3T without administration of a contrast agent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Coronary MRA with Dixon water-fat separation or with SPIR fat suppression was compared on a 3T scanner equipped with a 32-channel cardiac receiver coil. Eight healthy volunteers were examined. Contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), right coronary artery (RCA), and left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery sharpness and length were measured and statistically compared. Two experienced cardiologists graded the visual image quality of reformatted Dixon and SPIR images (1: poor quality to 5: excellent quality). RESULTS: Coronary MRA images in healthy volunteers showed improved contrast with the Dixon technique compared to SPIR (CNR (blood-fat): Dixon = 14.9 ± 2.9 and SPIR = 13.9 ± 2.1; p = 0.08, CNR (blood-myocardium): Dixon = 10.2 ± 2.7 and SPIR = 9.11 ± 2.6; p = 0.1). The Dixon method led to similar fat suppression (fat SNR with Dixon: 2.1 ± 0.5 vs. SPIR: 2.4 ± 1.2, p = 0.3), but resulted in significantly increased SNR of blood (blood SNR with Dixon: 19.9 ± 4.5 vs. SPIR: 15.5 ± 3.1, p < 0.05). This means the residual fat signal is slightly lower with the Dixon compared to the SIPR technique (although not significant), while the SNR of blood is significantly higher with the Dixon technique. Vessel sharpness of the RCA was similar for Dixon and SPIR (57 ± 7 % vs. 56 ± 9 %, p = 0.2), while the RCA visualized vessel length was increased compared to SPIR fat suppression (107 ± 21 vs. 101 ± 21 mm, p < 0.001). For the LAD, vessel sharpness (50 ± 13 % vs. 50 ± 7 %, p = 0.4) and vessel length (92 ± 46 vs. 90 ± 47 mm, p = 0.4) were similar with both techniques. Consequently, the Dixon technique resulted in an improved visual score of the coronary arteries in the water fat separated images of healthy subjects (RCA: 4.6 ± 0.5 vs. 4.1 ± 0.7, p = 0.01, LAD: 4.1 ± 0.7 vs. 3.5 ± 0.8, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Dixon water-fat separation can significantly improve coronary artery image quality without the use of a contrast agent at 3T. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016-04-02 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC5033991/ /pubmed/27038934 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10334-016-0550-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Nezafat, Maryam Henningsson, Markus Ripley, David P. Dedieu, Nathalie Greil, Gerald Greenwood, John P. Börnert, Peter Plein, Sven Botnar, René M. Coronary MR angiography at 3T: fat suppression versus water-fat separation |
title | Coronary MR angiography at 3T: fat suppression versus water-fat separation |
title_full | Coronary MR angiography at 3T: fat suppression versus water-fat separation |
title_fullStr | Coronary MR angiography at 3T: fat suppression versus water-fat separation |
title_full_unstemmed | Coronary MR angiography at 3T: fat suppression versus water-fat separation |
title_short | Coronary MR angiography at 3T: fat suppression versus water-fat separation |
title_sort | coronary mr angiography at 3t: fat suppression versus water-fat separation |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5033991/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27038934 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10334-016-0550-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nezafatmaryam coronarymrangiographyat3tfatsuppressionversuswaterfatseparation AT henningssonmarkus coronarymrangiographyat3tfatsuppressionversuswaterfatseparation AT ripleydavidp coronarymrangiographyat3tfatsuppressionversuswaterfatseparation AT dedieunathalie coronarymrangiographyat3tfatsuppressionversuswaterfatseparation AT greilgerald coronarymrangiographyat3tfatsuppressionversuswaterfatseparation AT greenwoodjohnp coronarymrangiographyat3tfatsuppressionversuswaterfatseparation AT bornertpeter coronarymrangiographyat3tfatsuppressionversuswaterfatseparation AT pleinsven coronarymrangiographyat3tfatsuppressionversuswaterfatseparation AT botnarrenem coronarymrangiographyat3tfatsuppressionversuswaterfatseparation |