Login Register Cart 0
Generic placeholder image

Current Medical Imaging

Editor-in-Chief

ISSN (Print): 1573-4056
ISSN (Online): 1875-6603

Back
Journal Home About Journal Editorial Board Journal Insight Current Issue Volumes/Issues
Subscribe
Research Article

Comparison between Conventional Breath-hold and Respiratory-triggered Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography with and without Compressed Sensing: Cross-sectional Study

Author(s): Younguk Kim, Eun Sun Lee*, Hyun Jeong Park, Sung Bin Park, Bernd Kuehn, Jae Kon Sung, Yaeji Lim and Changwoo Kim

Volume 20, 2024

Published on: 18 May, 2023

Article ID: e280323215033 Pages: 10

DOI: 10.2174/1573405620666230328093206

Price: $65

Abstract

Introduction: The application of compressed sensing (CS) has enabled breath-hold 3D-MRCP with a shorter acquisition time in clinical practice.

Aim: To compare the image quality of breath-hold (BH) and respiratory-triggered (RT) 3D-MRCP with or without CS application in the same study population.

Methods: In this retrospective study, from February to July 2020, a total of 98 consecutive patients underwent four different acquisition types of 3D-MRCP.; 1) BH MRCP with the generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisition (GRAPPA) (BH-GRAPPA), 2) RT-GRAPPA-MRCP, 3) RT-CSMRCP and 4) BH-CS-MRCP. Relative contrast of common bile duct, 5-scale visibility score of biliary pancreatic ducts, 3-scale artifact score and 5-scale overall image quality score were evaluated by two abdominal radiologists.

Results: Relative contrast value was significantly higher in BH-CS or RT-CS than in RT-GRAPPA (0.90 ± 0.057 and 0.89 ± 0.079, respectively, vs. 0.82 ± 0.071, p < 0.01) or BH-GRAPPA (vs. 0.77 ± 0.080, p < 0.01). The area affected by artifact was significantly lower in BH-CS among 4 MRCPs (p < 0.01). Overall image quality score in BH-CS was significantly higher than BH-GRAPPA (3.40 vs. 2.71, p < 0.01). There were no significant differences between RT-GRAPPA and BH-CS (vs. 3.13, p = 0.67) in overall image quality.

Conclusion: In this study, our results revealed BH-CS had higher relative contrast and comparable or superior image quality among four MRCP sequences.

[1]
Griffin N, Charles-Edwards G, Grant LA. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: The ABC of MRCP. Insights Imaging 2012; 3(1): 11-21.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13244-011-0129-9] [PMID: 22695995]
[2]
Taylor ACF, Little AF, Hennessy OF, Banting SW, Smith PJ, Desmond PV. Prospective assessment of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for noninvasive imaging of the biliary tree. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 55(1): 17-22.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1067/mge.2002.120324] [PMID: 11756908]
[3]
Vidal BPC, Lahan-Martins D, Penachim TJ, Rodstein MAM, Cardia PP, Prando A. MR cholangiopancreatography: What every radiology resident must know. Radiographics 2020; 40(5): 1263-4.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/rg.2020200030] [PMID: 32870770]
[4]
Seo N, Park MS, Han K, et al. Feasibility of 3D navigator-triggered magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with combined parallel imaging and compressed sensing reconstruction at 3T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017; 46(5): 1289-97.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25672] [PMID: 28295827]
[5]
Lee JH, Lee SS, Kim JY, et al. Parallel imaging improves the image quality and duct visibility of breathhold two-dimensional thick-slab MR cholangiopancreatography. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014; 39(2): 269-75.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24155] [PMID: 23596083]
[6]
Yeh BM, Liu PS, Soto JA, Corvera CA, Hussain HK. MR imaging and CT of the biliary tract. Radiographics 2009; 29(6): 1669-88.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/rg.296095514] [PMID: 19959515]
[7]
Yoon JH, Lee SM, Kang HJ, et al. Clinical feasibility of 3-Dimensional magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography using compressed sensing. Invest Radiol 2017; 52(10): 612-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000380] [PMID: 28448309]
[8]
Bates DDB, LeBedis CA, Soto JA, Gupta A. Use of magnetic resonance in pancreaticobiliary emergencies. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2016; 24(2): 433-48.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2015.11.010] [PMID: 27150328]
[9]
Feng L, Benkert T, Block KT, Sodickson DK, Otazo R, Chandarana H. Compressed sensing for body MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2017; 45(4): 966-87.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25547] [PMID: 27981664]
[10]
Jaspan ON, Fleysher R, Lipton ML. Compressed sensing MRI: A review of the clinical literature. Br J Radiol 2015; 88(1056): 20150487.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20150487] [PMID: 26402216]
[11]
Yoon JH, Nickel MD, Peeters JM, Lee JM. Rapid imaging: Recent advances in abdominal mri for reducing acquisition time and its clinical applications. Korean J Radiol 2019; 20(12): 1597-615.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2018.0931] [PMID: 31854148]
[12]
Ye JC. Compressed sensing MRI: A review from signal processing perspective. BMC Biomed Eng 2019; 1(1): 8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42490-019-0006-z] [PMID: 32903346]
[13]
Song JS, Kim SH, Kuehn B, Paek MY. Optimized breath-hold compressed-sensing 3D MR cholangiopancreatography at 3T: Image quality analysis and clinical feasibility assessment. Diagnostics 2020; 10(6): 376.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10060376] [PMID: 32517113]
[14]
Kwon H, Reid S, Kim D, Lee S, Cho J, Oh J. Diagnosing common bile duct obstruction: Comparison of image quality and diagnostic performance of three-dimensional magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with and without compressed sensing. Abdom Radiol 2018; 43(9): 2255-61.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-017-1451-6] [PMID: 29302736]
[15]
Kromrey ML, Funayama S, Tamada D, et al. Clinical evaluation of respiratory-triggered 3D MRCP with navigator echoes compared to breath-hold acquisition using compressed sensing and/or parallel imaging. Magn Reson Med Sci 2020; 19(4): 318-23.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2463/mrms.mp-2019-0122] [PMID: 31645536]
[16]
Chandarana H, Doshi AM, Shanbhogue A, et al. Three-dimensional MR cholangiopancreatography in a breath hold with sparsity-based reconstruction of highly undersampled data. Radiology 2016; 280(2): 585-94.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016151935] [PMID: 26982678]
[17]
Morita S, Ueno E, Suzuki K, et al. Navigator-triggered prospective acquisition correction (PACE) technique vs. conventional respiratory-triggered technique for free-breathing 3D MRCP: An initial prospective comparative study using healthy volunteers. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008; 28(3): 673-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21485] [PMID: 18777550]
[18]
Hosseinzadeh K, Furlan A, Almusa O. 2D thick-slab MR cholangiopancreatography: Does parallel imaging with sensitivity encoding improve image quality and duct visualization? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 190(6): W327-34.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.2854] [PMID: 18492874]
[19]
Nagata S, Goshima S, Noda Y, et al. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography using optimized integrated combination with parallel imaging and compressed sensing technique. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2019; 44(5): 1766-72.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-01886-0] [PMID: 30659308]
[20]
Worters PW, Sung K, Stevens KJ, Koch KM, Hargreaves BA. Compressed-Sensing multispectral imaging of the postoperative spine. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013; 37(1): 243-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmri.23750] [PMID: 22791572]
[21]
Tokoro H, Yamada A, Suzuki T, et al. Usefulness of breath-hold compressed sensing accelerated three-dimensional magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) added to respiratory-gating conventional MRCP. Eur J Radiol 2020; 122: 108765.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108765] [PMID: 31830630]

Rights & Permissions Print Cite
© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy