MRI of respiratory dynamics with 2D steady-state free-precession and 2D gradient echo sequences at 1.5 and 3 Tesla: an observer preference study.
To compare the image quality of dynamic lung MRI with variations of steady-state free-precession (SSFP) and gradient echo (GRE) cine techniques at 1.5 T and 3 T. Ventilated porcine lungs with simulated lesions inside a chest phantom and four healthy human subjects were assessed with SSFP (TR/TE=2.9/1.22 ms; 3 ima/s) and GRE sequences (TR/TE=2.34/0.96 ms; 8 ima/s) as baseline at 1.5 and 3 T. Modified SSFPs were performed with nine to ten images/s (parallel imaging factors 2 and 3). Image quality for representative structures and artifacts was ranked by three observers independently. At 1.5 T, standard SSFP achieved the best image quality with superior spatial resolution and signal, but equal temporal resolution to GRE. SSFP with improved temporal resolution was ranked second best. Further acceleration (PI factor 3) was of no benefit, but increased artifacts. At 3 T, GRE outranged SSFP imaging with high lesion signal intensity, while artifacts on SSFP images increased visibly. At 1.5 T, a modified SSFP with moderate parallel imaging (PI factor 2) was considered the best compromise of temporal and spatial resolution. At 3 T, GRE sequences remain the best choice for dynamic lung MRI.
Fabel
M
M
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 9, 24105 Kiel, Germany. m.fabel@rad.uni-kiel.de
Wintersperger
B J
BJ
Dietrich
O
O
Eichinger
M
M
Fink
C
C
Puderbach
M
M
Kauczor
H-U
HU
Schoenberg
S O
SO
Biederer
J
J
D000328:Adult; D000818:Animals; D016477:Artifacts; D003287:Contrast Media / Q000494:pharmacology; D006801:Humans; D007090:Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted; D008168:Lung / Q000473:pathology*; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000379:methods*; D015588:Observer Variation; D019047:Phantoms, Imaging; D011859:Radiography; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012119:Respiration; D012137:Respiratory System / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000473:pathology*; D013552:Swine; D013997:Time Factors
D003287:Contrast Media
Invest Radiol. 2007 Oct;42(10):715-25
17984769
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007 Aug;26(2):375-85
17622966
Eur Radiol. 2006 Oct;16(10):2147-52
16673092
Eur Radiol. 2006 Jun;16(6):1216-25
16538426
In Vivo. 2006 Jan-Feb;20(1):173-82
16433049
Eur Radiol. 2005 Aug;15(8):1586-97
15875193
Eur J Radiol. 1999 Feb;29(2):114-32
10374660
Radiother Oncol. 2007 Nov;85(2):215-22
17923161
Rofo. 2006 Nov;178(11):1067-72
17128376
Rofo. 2005 Jan;177(1):41-9
15657819
Radiology. 2006 Dec;241(3):880-91
17032908
Radiologe. 2006 Apr;46(4):267-70, 272-4
16395604
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000 Aug;175(2):391-7
10915681
Radiologe. 2004 Sep;44(9):882-8
15349729
Med Klin (Munich). 2005 Jan 15;100(1):62-72
15654546
Rofo. 1999 May;170(5):449-56
10370408
Rofo. 2005 Nov;177(11):1513-21
16302132
Eur J Radiol. 2007 Feb;61(2):256-61
17034975
Eur Radiol. 2005 Feb;15(2):324-8
15565313
Eur Radiol. 2006 Sep;16(9):1942-50
16628438
Eur J Radiol. 2007 Dec;64(3):345-55
17900843
Invest Radiol. 2007 Jun;42(6):377-83
17507808
Eur J Radiol. 1999 Feb;29(2):152-9
10374663
Radiologe. 2004 Sep;44(9):854-63
15349733
JAMA. 2003 Dec 24;290(24):3199-206
14693872
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2006;8(5):709-15
16891230
Radiologe. 2006 Apr;46(4):251-4, 256-9
16440188
Radiology. 2003 Jan;226(1):250-5
12511698