Makoto Suzuki1, Tatsuya Kuramoto1, Yuki Hachiman1, Yu Nishina2, Satoru Morita2, Kayoko Abe2, and Masami Yoneyama3
1Department of radiological servece, Tokyo Women's Medical University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, 2Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Tokyo Women's Medical University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, 3IS Business Group, Philips electronics japan, Tokyo, Japan
Synopsis
Direct-coronal diffusion-weighted whole body
imaging with background body signal suppression using single-shot turbo spin-echo (TSE-DWIBS) with b-values of 400, 600, 800, and 1000 mm2/s, and DWIBS using echo-planner imaging (EPI-DWIBS) with b-value of 1000mm2/s were obtained using 3T
MR scanner in 5 healthy volunteers. We investigated optimal b-value of
TSE-DWIBS and compared image distortions, contrast, signal-to-noise ratio
(SNR), and artifacts between TSE-DWIBS and EPI-DWIBS. Image contrast and SNR of TSE-DWIBS with b-value of
800 mm2/s were equivalent to those of EPI-DWIBS with b-value of 1000
mm2/s. TSE-DWIBS had less image distortions and artifacts than
EPI-DWIBS. Direct-coronal TSE-DWIBS using 3T MRI can be applied for clinical
cases.Introduction
Diffusion-weighted whole body
imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS) can visualize
malignant tumors, abscesses, and abnormal lymph nodes [1]. Single-shot
echo-planner imaging (EPI) is
commonly used for DWIBS (EPI-DWIBS) at 1.5T MRI. However, at 3T MRI EPI-DWIBS has
problem of image distortions and various artifacts [2]. Currently, development of MR devices, including the
coils and application software, brought about DWI using single-shot turbo spin-echo
(TSE-DWI) at 3T MRI and TSE-DWI is reported to show less image distortions and
artifacts in comparison with EPI technique [3] . Therefore, we expect that
direct- coronal TSE-DWIBS is capable of creating higher
image quality with shorter acquisition time than
EPI-DWIBS.
Purpose
We investigated optimal b-value of TSE-DWIBS and
compared image distortions, contrast, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and
artifacts between TSE-DWIBS and EPI-DWIBS.
Methods
All examinations were performed using 3T MR scanner (Inenia,
Phillips) in 5 healthy volunteers (4 males, 1 female; mean age: 28.4 years;
range: 26-32 years) and included direct-coronal TSE-DWIBS, EPI-DWIBS and T2WI
from neck to pelvis. Imaging parameters of TSE-DWIBS was based on those of
EPI-DWIBS with b-value of 1000 mm2/s [4] (Table 1).
This
study consists of three parts:
(1) Image distortions
We measured image distortions at each spinal cord level
(C5, Th3, Th8, L1) using fusion images of T2WI and TSE-DWIBS (b-value: 600
mm2/s) or EPI-DWIBS (Fig.
1).
(2) Contrasts and SNR
We calculated the latissimus dorsi-to-spinal cord signal
intensity ratio (referring to lesion-to spinal cord ratio (LSR) [5] ) of EPI-DWIBS
and TSE-DWIBS (b-value: 400, 600, 800, 1000 mm2/s)
to evaluate contrast of each images. SNRs were calculated by
dividing the average signal intensity in the region of interest (ROI), which
was set in the latissimus dorsi, with the standard deviation of signal
intensity in the ROI.
(3) Image quality assessment
Two independent readers estimated the overall image
quality including artifacts and SNR (Fig. 2).
Results
(1) Image distortions
✓EPI-DWIBS
C5: 7.4 ± 1.7mm, Th3: 3.6 ± 2.2mm, Th8: 0.75
± 1.3mm, L1: 4.2 ± 2.5mm.
Some points were unmeasurable (especially
Th3) .
✓TSE-DWIBS (b-value: 600
mm2/s)
All points were measurable and no image
distortion was noted at all levels.
(2) Contrasts and SNR
✓LSR of EPI-DWIBS (b-value: 1000 mm2/s): 4.3 ± 0.62
✓LSR of TSE-DWIBS with b-value:
400 mm2/s: 3.4 ± 0.26, 600 mm2/s: 4.0
± 0.41, 800 mm2/s: 4.4
± 0.61, 1000 mm2/s: 4.7
± 0.62
✓SNR of EPI-DWIBS (b-value: 1000 mm2/s): 10.1 ± 2.2
✓SNR of TSE-DWIBS with b-value:
400 mm2/s: 20.1 ± 5.6, 600 mm2/s:
13.3 ± 1.7, 800 mm2/s:
10.3 ± 1.8, 1000 mm2/s: 10.1
± 2.2.
(3) Image quality assessment
Compared to TSE-DWIBS,
EPI-DWIBS showed insufficient signal suppression of fatty tissue in all images. TSE-DWIBS showed less image distortion; however, using
higher b-value lead to lower SNR and using lower b-value showed effects of
signal intensity of urinary bladder and cerebral spinal fluid.
Disscussion
In this study,
EPI-DWIBS shows imaging distortions to the phase encoding direction, and no
signal was noted at several regions due to susceptibility artifacts. We
suspected that chemical artifacts caused insufficient
signal suppression of fatty tissue on EPI-DWIBS. In contrast, TSE-DWIBS had no effect
on phase
encoding direction and various artifacts.
As
for LSR and SNR, the values of EPI-DWIBS with b-value of 1000 mm2/s
was close to those of TSE-DWIBS with b-value of 800 mm2/s.
Since lower b-value of DWIBS leads to less water signal suppression and higher
b-value of DWIBS leads to lower SNR, we are considered that TSE-DWIBS with b-value of 800
mm2/s would be an ideal setting for yielding a detailed image in these imaging
parameters.
Conclusion
Direct-coronal TSE-DWIBS displays less image
distortions and less various artifacts than EPI-DWIBS. TSE-DWIBS with b-value
of 800 mm2/s is comparable to EPI-DWIBS with b-value of 1000 mm2/s
with regard to LSR, SNR, and image
quality assessment. We suggest that direct-coronal TSE-DWIBS using 3T MRI can be applied to clinical cases.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. Takahara
T, Imai Y, Yamashita T, et al. Diffusion weighted whole body imaging with
background body signal suppression (DWIBS): technical improvement using free
breathing STIR and high
resolution 3D display. Radiat Med.
2004;22:275–28217.
2. Kwee,
T. C, Takahara, T. Ochiai, R. Diffusion-weighted whole-body imaging with
background body signal suppression (DWIBS): features and potential applications
in oncology. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:1937–1952
3. Verhappen
MH, Pouwels PJ, Ljumanovic R, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in head and
neck cancer: comparison between half-fourier acquired single-shot turbo
spin-echo and EPI techniques. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;33:1239-46.
4. Mürtz,
P, Kaschner, M, Träber, et al. Diffusion-weighted whole-body MRI with
background body signal suppression: Technical improvements at 3.0 T. J. Magn.
Reson. Imaging. 2012;35:456–461.
5.
Uto
T, Takehara Y, Nakamura Y, et al. Higher sensitivity and specificity for
diffusion-weighted imaging of malignant lung lesions without apparent diffusion
coefficient quantification. Radiology. 2009;252:247–254