Cargando…
Comparison of image quality of head and neck lesions between 3D gradient echo sequences with compressed sensing and the multi-slice spin echo sequence
BACKGROUND: Although magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides excellent soft-tissue contrast, long acquisition times are major disadvantages. PURPOSE: To evaluate the usefulness of compressed sensing (CS) for contrast-enhanced oral and maxillofacial MRI by comparing the 3D T1 turbo field echo with...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8819772/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35140985 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2058460120956644 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Although magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides excellent soft-tissue contrast, long acquisition times are major disadvantages. PURPOSE: To evaluate the usefulness of compressed sensing (CS) for contrast-enhanced oral and maxillofacial MRI by comparing the 3D T1 turbo field echo with compressed SENSE (CS-3D-T1TFE) sequence with the multi-slice spin echo (MS-SE) sequence as the reference standard. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty patients with orofacial lesions participated in this study. The scan times for MS-SE and CS-3D-T1TFE were 5 min 56 s and 1 min 43 s, respectively. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was calculated for quantitative analysis and seven parameters (degree of lesion conspicuity, motion artifacts, metal artifacts, pulsation artifacts, quality of fat suppression, homogeneity of blood vessel signal intensity, and overall image quality) were evaluated using a 5-point scale (5 = excellent, 1 = unacceptable) by two observers for qualitative analysis. For comparisons between MS-SE and CS-3D-T1TFE, the paired t-test was used. RESULTS: The SNR of CS-3D-T1TFE was higher than or equal to that of MS-SE. The CS-3D-T1TFE scores for motion artifacts, pulsation artifacts, and homogeneity of blood vessel signal intensity were higher than the corresponding MS-SE scores in assessments by both observers. The MS-SE scores for fat suppression were higher than or equal to the CS-3D-T1TFE scores. There were no significant differences in lesion conspicuity, metal artifacts, and overall image quality between the two sequences. CONCLUSION: CS-3D-T1TFE imaging, less than 30% of the scan time for MS-SE, showed no image degradation while retaining equal or higher SNR and image quality. |
---|