Comparison of Three, Motion-Resistant MR Sequences on Hepatobiliary Phase for Gadoxetic Acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-Enhanced MR Imaging of the Liver.
10.13104/imri.2017.21.2.71
- Author:
Doo Ri KIM
1
;
Bong Soo KIM
;
Jeong Sub LEE
;
Guk Myung CHOI
;
Seung Hyoung KIM
;
Myeng Ju GOH
;
Byung Cheol SONG
;
Mu Sook LEE
;
Kyung Ryeol LEE
;
Su Yeon KO
Author Information
1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Jeju National University Hospital, Jeju, Korea. 671228kbs@naver.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Liver;
Magnetic resonance imaging;
Breath-holding;
Gadolinium ethoxybenzyl DTPA
- MeSH:
Acceleration;
Artifacts;
Humans;
Liver*;
Magnetic Resonance Imaging*;
Retrospective Studies;
Signal-To-Noise Ratio
- From:Investigative Magnetic Resonance Imaging
2017;21(2):71-81
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To compare three, motion-resistant, T1-weighted MR sequences on the hepatobiliary phase for gadoxetic acid-enhanced MR imaging of the liver. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, 79 patients underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced, 3T liver MR imaging. Fifty-nine were examined using a standard protocol, and 20 were examined using a motion-resistant protocol. During the hepatocyte-specific phase, three MR sequences were acquired: 1) gradient recalled echo (GRE) with controlled aliasing in parallel imaging results in higher acceleration (CAIPIRINHA); 2) radial GRE with the interleaved angle-bisection scheme (ILAB); and 3) radial GRE with golden-angle scheme (GA). Two readers independently assessed images with motion artifacts, streaking artifacts, liver-edge sharpness, hepatic vessel clarity, lesion conspicuity, and overall image quality, using a 5-point scale. The images were assessed by measurement of liver signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and tumor-to-liver contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). The results were compared, using repeated post-hoc, paired t-tests with Bonferroni correction and the Wilcoxon signed rank test with Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: In the qualitative analysis of cooperative patients, the results for CAIPIRINHA had significantly higher ratings for streak artifacts, liver-edge sharpness, hepatic vessel clarity, and overall image quality as compared to, radial GRE, (P < 0.016). In the imaging of uncooperative patients, higher scores were recorded for ILAB and GA with respect to all of the qualitative assessments, except for streak artifact, compared with CAIPIRINHA (P < 0.016). However, no significant differences were found between ILAB and GA. For quantitative analysis in uncooperative patients, the mean liver SNR and lesion-to-liver CNR with radial GRE were significantly higher than those of CAIPIRINHA (P < 0.016). CONCLUSION: In uncooperative patients, the use of the radial GRE sequence can improve the image quality compared to GRE imaging with CAIPIRINHA, despite the data acquisition methods used. The GRE imaging with CAIPIRINHA is applicable for patients without breath-holding difficulties.
