Cargando…
Comparison between 2D and 3D MEDIC for human cervical spinal cord MRI at 3T
INTRODUCTION: High‐resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the cervical spinal cord is important to provide accurate diagnosis and pathological assessment of injuries. MEDIC (Multiple Echo Data Image Combination) sequences have been used in clinical MRI; however, a comparison of the performan...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7890925/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32931647 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.433 |
_version_ | 1783652598116515840 |
---|---|
author | Asiri, Abdullah Dimpudus, Franky Atcheson, Nicole Al‐Najjar, Aiman McMahon, Katie Kurniawan, Nyoman D. |
author_facet | Asiri, Abdullah Dimpudus, Franky Atcheson, Nicole Al‐Najjar, Aiman McMahon, Katie Kurniawan, Nyoman D. |
author_sort | Asiri, Abdullah |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: High‐resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the cervical spinal cord is important to provide accurate diagnosis and pathological assessment of injuries. MEDIC (Multiple Echo Data Image Combination) sequences have been used in clinical MRI; however, a comparison of the performance of 2D and 3D MEDIC for cervical spinal cord imaging has not been reported. The aim of this study is to compare axial 2D and 3D MEDIC for the visualisation of the grey matter (GM) and white matter (WM) of the human cervical spinal cord. METHODS: Eight healthy participants were scanned using Siemens Prisma(fit) 3T MRI. T2*‐weighted gradient spoiled 2D and 3D MEDIC sequences were acquired at 0.4 × 0.4 × 3.0 and 0.3 × 0.3 × 3.0 mm resolutions, with the acquisition times of 6 and 7 min, respectively. Quantitative analyses of the images were made based on the image signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR), contrast‐to‐noise ratio (CNR) and non‐uniformity (NU). Two independent radiologists (CS and FN), each provided Likert scoring assessments of anatomical visibility of the GM and WM structures and image clarity for all samples. RESULTS: Quantitative evaluation showed that 3D MEDIC provided higher SNR, higher CNR and lower NU than 2D MEDIC. However, 2D MEDIC provided better anatomical visibility for the GM, WM and CSF, and higher image clarity (lower artefacts) compared to 3D MEDIC. CONCLUSIONS: 2D MEDIC provides better information for depicting the internal structures of the cervical spinal cord compared to 3D MEDIC. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7890925 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78909252021-03-10 Comparison between 2D and 3D MEDIC for human cervical spinal cord MRI at 3T Asiri, Abdullah Dimpudus, Franky Atcheson, Nicole Al‐Najjar, Aiman McMahon, Katie Kurniawan, Nyoman D. J Med Radiat Sci Original Articles INTRODUCTION: High‐resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the cervical spinal cord is important to provide accurate diagnosis and pathological assessment of injuries. MEDIC (Multiple Echo Data Image Combination) sequences have been used in clinical MRI; however, a comparison of the performance of 2D and 3D MEDIC for cervical spinal cord imaging has not been reported. The aim of this study is to compare axial 2D and 3D MEDIC for the visualisation of the grey matter (GM) and white matter (WM) of the human cervical spinal cord. METHODS: Eight healthy participants were scanned using Siemens Prisma(fit) 3T MRI. T2*‐weighted gradient spoiled 2D and 3D MEDIC sequences were acquired at 0.4 × 0.4 × 3.0 and 0.3 × 0.3 × 3.0 mm resolutions, with the acquisition times of 6 and 7 min, respectively. Quantitative analyses of the images were made based on the image signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR), contrast‐to‐noise ratio (CNR) and non‐uniformity (NU). Two independent radiologists (CS and FN), each provided Likert scoring assessments of anatomical visibility of the GM and WM structures and image clarity for all samples. RESULTS: Quantitative evaluation showed that 3D MEDIC provided higher SNR, higher CNR and lower NU than 2D MEDIC. However, 2D MEDIC provided better anatomical visibility for the GM, WM and CSF, and higher image clarity (lower artefacts) compared to 3D MEDIC. CONCLUSIONS: 2D MEDIC provides better information for depicting the internal structures of the cervical spinal cord compared to 3D MEDIC. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-09-15 2021-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7890925/ /pubmed/32931647 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.433 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy and New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technology This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Asiri, Abdullah Dimpudus, Franky Atcheson, Nicole Al‐Najjar, Aiman McMahon, Katie Kurniawan, Nyoman D. Comparison between 2D and 3D MEDIC for human cervical spinal cord MRI at 3T |
title | Comparison between 2D and 3D MEDIC for human cervical spinal cord MRI at 3T |
title_full | Comparison between 2D and 3D MEDIC for human cervical spinal cord MRI at 3T |
title_fullStr | Comparison between 2D and 3D MEDIC for human cervical spinal cord MRI at 3T |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison between 2D and 3D MEDIC for human cervical spinal cord MRI at 3T |
title_short | Comparison between 2D and 3D MEDIC for human cervical spinal cord MRI at 3T |
title_sort | comparison between 2d and 3d medic for human cervical spinal cord mri at 3t |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7890925/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32931647 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.433 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT asiriabdullah comparisonbetween2dand3dmedicforhumancervicalspinalcordmriat3t AT dimpudusfranky comparisonbetween2dand3dmedicforhumancervicalspinalcordmriat3t AT atchesonnicole comparisonbetween2dand3dmedicforhumancervicalspinalcordmriat3t AT alnajjaraiman comparisonbetween2dand3dmedicforhumancervicalspinalcordmriat3t AT mcmahonkatie comparisonbetween2dand3dmedicforhumancervicalspinalcordmriat3t AT kurniawannyomand comparisonbetween2dand3dmedicforhumancervicalspinalcordmriat3t |