Cargando…

Diagnosis of intracranial lesions using accelerated 3D T1 MPRAGE with wave-CAIPI technique: comparison with conventional 3D T1 MPRAGE

We aimed to evaluate the agreement in the diagnosis of intracranial lesions between conventional pre-contrast 3D T1 magnetization-prepared rapid gradient echo (MPRAGE) and wave-CAIPI (wave-controlled aliasing in parallel imaging) MPRAGE. Institutional review board approval was obtained and informed...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Eun Jung, Kim, Min Gu, Chung, Mi Sun, Kim, Seon-Ok, Byun, Jun Soo, Yim, Younghee
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9763340/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36536040
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-25725-x
Descripción
Sumario:We aimed to evaluate the agreement in the diagnosis of intracranial lesions between conventional pre-contrast 3D T1 magnetization-prepared rapid gradient echo (MPRAGE) and wave-CAIPI (wave-controlled aliasing in parallel imaging) MPRAGE. Institutional review board approval was obtained and informed consent was waived for this retrospective study. We included 149 consecutive patients who had undergone brain MR with both conventional MPRAGE (scan time: 5 min 42 s) and wave-CAIPI MPRAGE (scan time: 2 min 44 s) from February to June 2018. All images were independently reviewed by two radiologists for the diagnosis of intracranial lesion and scored image quality using visual analysis. One technician measured signal-to-noise ratio. The agreement for diagnosis of intracranial lesion was calculated, and the intra- and interobserver agreements were analyzed by using kappa value. For the diagnosis of intracranial lesion, the conventional and wave-CAIPI MPRAGE demonstrated 99.7% of agreement (297 of 298) in the pooled analysis with very good agreement (k = 0.994). Intra- and inter-observer agreement showed very good (k > 0.9 in all) and good (k > 0.75) agreement, respectively. In the quantitative analysis, the signal-to-noise ratio had no difference (P > 0.05 for all). The overall image quality was poorer in images of wave-CAIPI MPRAGE (P < 0.001), but motion artifact had no difference between two sequences (P = 0.06). Compared to conventional MPRAGE, pre-contrast 3D T1 wave-CAIPI MPRAGE achieved higher agreement for the diagnosis of intracranial lesions and reduced the scan time by approximately 50%.