Detailed Information

Cited 0 time in webofscience Cited 0 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

Assessment of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging-FLAIR Mismatch: Comparison between Conventional FLAIR versus Shorter-Repetition-Time FLAIR at 3T

Authors
고병호김응엽
Issue Date
2016
Publisher
대한자기공명의과학회
Keywords
Acute ischemic stroke; Magnetic resonance imaging; Diffusion-weighted imaging; Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery
Citation
Investigative Magnetic Resonance Imaging, v.20, no.2, pp.88 - 94
Journal Title
Investigative Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Volume
20
Number
2
Start Page
88
End Page
94
URI
https://scholarworks.bwise.kr/gachon/handle/2020.sw.gachon/9412
DOI
10.13104/imri.2016.20.2.88
ISSN
2384-1095
Abstract
Purpose: Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) imaging can be obtained faster with shorter repletion time (TR), but it gets noisier. We hypothesized that shorter- TR FLAIR obtained at 3 tesla (3T) with a 32-channel coil may be comparable to conventional FLAIR. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic value between conventional FLAIR (TR = 9000 ms, FLAIR9000) and shorter-TR FLAIR (TR = 6000 ms, FLAIR6000) at 3T in terms of diffusion-weighted imaging-FLAIR mismatch. Materials and Methods: We recruited 184 patients with acute ischemic stroke (28 patients < 4.5 hours) who had undergone 5-mm diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and two successive 5-mm FLAIR images (no gap; in-plane resolution, 0.9 x 0.9 mm) at 3T with a 32-channel coil. The acquisition times for FLAIR9000 and FLAIR6000 were 108 seconds (generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions [GRAPPA] = 2) and 60 seconds (GRAPPA = 3), respectively. Two radiologists independently assessed the paired imaging sets (DWI-FLAIR9000 and DWI-FLAIR6000) for the presence of matched hyperintense lesions on each FLAIR imaging. The signal intensity ratios (area of DWI lesion to contralateral normal-appearing region) on both FLAIR imaging sets were compared. Results: DWI-FLAIR9000 mismatch was present in 39 of 184 (21.2%) patients, which was perfectly the same on FLAIR6000. Three of 145 patients (2%) with DWImatched lesions on FLAIR9000 had discrepancy on FLAIR6000, showing no significant difference (P > 0.05). Interobserver agreement was excellent for both DWI-FLAIR9000 and DWI-FLAIR6000 (k = 0.904 and 0.883, respectively). Between the two FLAIR imaging sets, there was no significant difference of signal intensity ratio (mean, standard deviation; 1.25 ± 0.20; 1.24 ± 0.20, respectively) (P > 0.05). Conclusion: For the determination of mismatch or match between DWI and FLAIR imaging, there is no significant difference between FLAIR9000 and FLAIR6000 at 3T with a 32-channel coil.
Files in This Item
There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in
Collections
의과대학 > 의학과 > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE