Cargando…

Comparison of the Timing of Hepatic Arterial Phase and Image Quality Using Test-Bolus and Bolus-Tracking Techniques in Gadolinium–Ethoxybenzyl–Diethylenetriamine Pentaacetic Acid–Enhanced Hepatic Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the image quality, the degree of artifacts and the percentage of timing of the optimal hepatic arterial phase (HAP) between test-bolus and bolus-tracking methods on gadolinium–ethoxybenzyl–diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)–enhanced mag...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Iyama, Yuji, Nakaura, Takeshi, Yokoyama, Koichi, Kidoh, Masafumi, Utsunomiya, Daisuke, Oda, Seitaro, Namimoto, Tomohiro, Yamashita, Yasuyuki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5516670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28240635
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000000583
_version_ 1783251200728104960
author Iyama, Yuji
Nakaura, Takeshi
Yokoyama, Koichi
Kidoh, Masafumi
Utsunomiya, Daisuke
Oda, Seitaro
Namimoto, Tomohiro
Yamashita, Yasuyuki
author_facet Iyama, Yuji
Nakaura, Takeshi
Yokoyama, Koichi
Kidoh, Masafumi
Utsunomiya, Daisuke
Oda, Seitaro
Namimoto, Tomohiro
Yamashita, Yasuyuki
author_sort Iyama, Yuji
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the image quality, the degree of artifacts and the percentage of timing of the optimal hepatic arterial phase (HAP) between test-bolus and bolus-tracking methods on gadolinium–ethoxybenzyl–diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)–enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: In this prospective study, 60 patients who underwent 3-dimensional dynamic Gd-EOB-DTPA–enhanced hepatic 3-T MRI were enrolled in this study. We randomly assigned the 30 patients to the bolus-tracking method, and another 30 patients to the test-bolus method. Signal-to-noise ratios of the liver and spleen in HAP were compared in the 2 groups. Two radiologists independently assessed the ratio of optimal timing of HAP and the degree of ringing and motion artifacts of the 2 protocols. RESULTS: The signal-to-noise ratios of the liver (24.0 [SD, 6.4] vs 20.4 [SD, 4.0]) and spleen (30.0 [SD, 13.3] vs 23.6 [SD, 9.9]) were significantly higher in the test-bolus protocol than in the bolus-tracking protocol. The ratio of optimal timing was also significantly higher with the test-bolus protocol than with the bolus-tracking protocol (76.7% vs 40.0%). The degree of ringing and motion artifacts of test-bolus protocol was significantly lower than that of the bolus-tracking protocol (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The test-bolus protocol in dynamic 3-T MRI can yield better qualitative image quality and more optimal timing of HAP images, while reducing the degree of artifacts compared with the bolus-tracking protocol.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5516670
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55166702017-07-31 Comparison of the Timing of Hepatic Arterial Phase and Image Quality Using Test-Bolus and Bolus-Tracking Techniques in Gadolinium–Ethoxybenzyl–Diethylenetriamine Pentaacetic Acid–Enhanced Hepatic Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging Iyama, Yuji Nakaura, Takeshi Yokoyama, Koichi Kidoh, Masafumi Utsunomiya, Daisuke Oda, Seitaro Namimoto, Tomohiro Yamashita, Yasuyuki J Comput Assist Tomogr Abdominal Imaging OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the image quality, the degree of artifacts and the percentage of timing of the optimal hepatic arterial phase (HAP) between test-bolus and bolus-tracking methods on gadolinium–ethoxybenzyl–diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)–enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: In this prospective study, 60 patients who underwent 3-dimensional dynamic Gd-EOB-DTPA–enhanced hepatic 3-T MRI were enrolled in this study. We randomly assigned the 30 patients to the bolus-tracking method, and another 30 patients to the test-bolus method. Signal-to-noise ratios of the liver and spleen in HAP were compared in the 2 groups. Two radiologists independently assessed the ratio of optimal timing of HAP and the degree of ringing and motion artifacts of the 2 protocols. RESULTS: The signal-to-noise ratios of the liver (24.0 [SD, 6.4] vs 20.4 [SD, 4.0]) and spleen (30.0 [SD, 13.3] vs 23.6 [SD, 9.9]) were significantly higher in the test-bolus protocol than in the bolus-tracking protocol. The ratio of optimal timing was also significantly higher with the test-bolus protocol than with the bolus-tracking protocol (76.7% vs 40.0%). The degree of ringing and motion artifacts of test-bolus protocol was significantly lower than that of the bolus-tracking protocol (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The test-bolus protocol in dynamic 3-T MRI can yield better qualitative image quality and more optimal timing of HAP images, while reducing the degree of artifacts compared with the bolus-tracking protocol. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2017-07 2017-02-24 /pmc/articles/PMC5516670/ /pubmed/28240635 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000000583 Text en Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Abdominal Imaging
Iyama, Yuji
Nakaura, Takeshi
Yokoyama, Koichi
Kidoh, Masafumi
Utsunomiya, Daisuke
Oda, Seitaro
Namimoto, Tomohiro
Yamashita, Yasuyuki
Comparison of the Timing of Hepatic Arterial Phase and Image Quality Using Test-Bolus and Bolus-Tracking Techniques in Gadolinium–Ethoxybenzyl–Diethylenetriamine Pentaacetic Acid–Enhanced Hepatic Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging
title Comparison of the Timing of Hepatic Arterial Phase and Image Quality Using Test-Bolus and Bolus-Tracking Techniques in Gadolinium–Ethoxybenzyl–Diethylenetriamine Pentaacetic Acid–Enhanced Hepatic Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging
title_full Comparison of the Timing of Hepatic Arterial Phase and Image Quality Using Test-Bolus and Bolus-Tracking Techniques in Gadolinium–Ethoxybenzyl–Diethylenetriamine Pentaacetic Acid–Enhanced Hepatic Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging
title_fullStr Comparison of the Timing of Hepatic Arterial Phase and Image Quality Using Test-Bolus and Bolus-Tracking Techniques in Gadolinium–Ethoxybenzyl–Diethylenetriamine Pentaacetic Acid–Enhanced Hepatic Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the Timing of Hepatic Arterial Phase and Image Quality Using Test-Bolus and Bolus-Tracking Techniques in Gadolinium–Ethoxybenzyl–Diethylenetriamine Pentaacetic Acid–Enhanced Hepatic Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging
title_short Comparison of the Timing of Hepatic Arterial Phase and Image Quality Using Test-Bolus and Bolus-Tracking Techniques in Gadolinium–Ethoxybenzyl–Diethylenetriamine Pentaacetic Acid–Enhanced Hepatic Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging
title_sort comparison of the timing of hepatic arterial phase and image quality using test-bolus and bolus-tracking techniques in gadolinium–ethoxybenzyl–diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid–enhanced hepatic dynamic magnetic resonance imaging
topic Abdominal Imaging
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5516670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28240635
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000000583
work_keys_str_mv AT iyamayuji comparisonofthetimingofhepaticarterialphaseandimagequalityusingtestbolusandbolustrackingtechniquesingadoliniumethoxybenzyldiethylenetriaminepentaaceticacidenhancedhepaticdynamicmagneticresonanceimaging
AT nakauratakeshi comparisonofthetimingofhepaticarterialphaseandimagequalityusingtestbolusandbolustrackingtechniquesingadoliniumethoxybenzyldiethylenetriaminepentaaceticacidenhancedhepaticdynamicmagneticresonanceimaging
AT yokoyamakoichi comparisonofthetimingofhepaticarterialphaseandimagequalityusingtestbolusandbolustrackingtechniquesingadoliniumethoxybenzyldiethylenetriaminepentaaceticacidenhancedhepaticdynamicmagneticresonanceimaging
AT kidohmasafumi comparisonofthetimingofhepaticarterialphaseandimagequalityusingtestbolusandbolustrackingtechniquesingadoliniumethoxybenzyldiethylenetriaminepentaaceticacidenhancedhepaticdynamicmagneticresonanceimaging
AT utsunomiyadaisuke comparisonofthetimingofhepaticarterialphaseandimagequalityusingtestbolusandbolustrackingtechniquesingadoliniumethoxybenzyldiethylenetriaminepentaaceticacidenhancedhepaticdynamicmagneticresonanceimaging
AT odaseitaro comparisonofthetimingofhepaticarterialphaseandimagequalityusingtestbolusandbolustrackingtechniquesingadoliniumethoxybenzyldiethylenetriaminepentaaceticacidenhancedhepaticdynamicmagneticresonanceimaging
AT namimototomohiro comparisonofthetimingofhepaticarterialphaseandimagequalityusingtestbolusandbolustrackingtechniquesingadoliniumethoxybenzyldiethylenetriaminepentaaceticacidenhancedhepaticdynamicmagneticresonanceimaging
AT yamashitayasuyuki comparisonofthetimingofhepaticarterialphaseandimagequalityusingtestbolusandbolustrackingtechniquesingadoliniumethoxybenzyldiethylenetriaminepentaaceticacidenhancedhepaticdynamicmagneticresonanceimaging