File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Qualitative and quantitative comparison of image quality between single-shot echo-planar and interleaved multi-shot echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging in female pelvis

TitleQualitative and quantitative comparison of image quality between single-shot echo-planar and interleaved multi-shot echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging in female pelvis
Authors
KeywordsEcho-planar imaging
Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging
Female
Pelvis
Artifacts
Issue Date2020
PublisherSpringer Verlag. The Journal's web site is located at http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00330/index.htm
Citation
European Radiology, 2020, v. 30, p. 1876-1884 How to Cite?
AbstractObjectives: To qualitatively and quantitatively compare the image quality between single-shot echo-planar (SS-EPI) and multi-shot echo-planar (IMS-EPI) diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in female pelvis Methods: This was a prospective study involving 80 females who underwent 3.0T pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). SS-EPI and IMS-EPI DWI were acquired with 3 b values (0, 400, 800 s/mm2). Two independent reviewers assessed the overall image quality, artifacts, sharpness, and lesion conspicuity based on a 5-point Likert scale. Regions of interest (ROI) were placed on the endometrium and the gluteus muscles to quantify the signal intensities and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and geometric distortion were quantified on both sequences. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using κ statistics and Kendall test. Qualitative scores were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test and quantitative parameters were compared with paired t test and Bland-Altman analysis. Results: IMS-EPI demonstrated better image quality than SS-EPI for all aspects evaluated (SS-EPI vs. IMS-EPI: overall quality 3.04 vs. 4.17, artifacts 3.09 vs. 3.99, sharpness 2.40 vs. 4.32, lesion conspicuity 3.20 vs. 4.25; p < 0.001). Good agreement and correlation were observed between two reviewers (SS-EPI κ 0.699, r 0.742; IMS-EPI κ 0.702, r 0.789). IMS-EPI showed lower geometric distortion, SNR, and CNR than SS-EPI (p < 0.050). There was no significant difference in the mean ADC between the two sequences. Conclusion: IMS-EPI showed better image quality with lower geometric distortion without affecting the quantification of ADC, though the SNR and CNR decreased due to post-processing limitations.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/285444
ISSN
2019 Impact Factor: 4.101
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.064
PubMed Central ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorAN, H-
dc.contributor.authorMa, X-
dc.contributor.authorPan, Z-
dc.contributor.authorGuo, H-
dc.contributor.authorLee, EYP-
dc.date.accessioned2020-08-18T03:53:28Z-
dc.date.available2020-08-18T03:53:28Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.citationEuropean Radiology, 2020, v. 30, p. 1876-1884-
dc.identifier.issn0938-7994-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/285444-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To qualitatively and quantitatively compare the image quality between single-shot echo-planar (SS-EPI) and multi-shot echo-planar (IMS-EPI) diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in female pelvis Methods: This was a prospective study involving 80 females who underwent 3.0T pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). SS-EPI and IMS-EPI DWI were acquired with 3 b values (0, 400, 800 s/mm2). Two independent reviewers assessed the overall image quality, artifacts, sharpness, and lesion conspicuity based on a 5-point Likert scale. Regions of interest (ROI) were placed on the endometrium and the gluteus muscles to quantify the signal intensities and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and geometric distortion were quantified on both sequences. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using κ statistics and Kendall test. Qualitative scores were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test and quantitative parameters were compared with paired t test and Bland-Altman analysis. Results: IMS-EPI demonstrated better image quality than SS-EPI for all aspects evaluated (SS-EPI vs. IMS-EPI: overall quality 3.04 vs. 4.17, artifacts 3.09 vs. 3.99, sharpness 2.40 vs. 4.32, lesion conspicuity 3.20 vs. 4.25; p < 0.001). Good agreement and correlation were observed between two reviewers (SS-EPI κ 0.699, r 0.742; IMS-EPI κ 0.702, r 0.789). IMS-EPI showed lower geometric distortion, SNR, and CNR than SS-EPI (p < 0.050). There was no significant difference in the mean ADC between the two sequences. Conclusion: IMS-EPI showed better image quality with lower geometric distortion without affecting the quantification of ADC, though the SNR and CNR decreased due to post-processing limitations.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherSpringer Verlag. The Journal's web site is located at http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00330/index.htm-
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Radiology-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectEcho-planar imaging-
dc.subjectDiffusion magnetic resonance imaging-
dc.subjectFemale-
dc.subjectPelvis-
dc.subjectArtifacts-
dc.titleQualitative and quantitative comparison of image quality between single-shot echo-planar and interleaved multi-shot echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging in female pelvis-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailLee, EYP: eyplee77@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityLee, EYP=rp01456-
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_version-
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00330-019-06491-3-
dc.identifier.pmid31822971-
dc.identifier.pmcidPMC7062860-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85076369604-
dc.identifier.hkuros312771-
dc.identifier.volume30-
dc.identifier.spage1876-
dc.identifier.epage1884-
dc.publisher.placeGermany-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats