Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1007/s00330-019-06491-3
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85076369604
- PMID: 31822971
- WOS: WOS:000519659200008
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
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
Title | Qualitative and quantitative comparison of image quality between single-shot echo-planar and interleaved multi-shot echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging in female pelvis |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | Echo-planar imaging Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging Female Pelvis Artifacts |
Issue Date | 2020 |
Publisher | Springer 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? |
Abstract | Objectives:
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 Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/285444 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 4.7 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.656 |
PubMed Central ID | |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | AN, H | - |
dc.contributor.author | Ma, X | - |
dc.contributor.author | Pan, Z | - |
dc.contributor.author | Guo, H | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lee, EYP | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-08-18T03:53:28Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2020-08-18T03:53:28Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | European Radiology, 2020, v. 30, p. 1876-1884 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0938-7994 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/285444 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Objectives: 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.language | eng | - |
dc.publisher | Springer Verlag. The Journal's web site is located at http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00330/index.htm | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | European Radiology | - |
dc.rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. | - |
dc.subject | Echo-planar imaging | - |
dc.subject | Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging | - |
dc.subject | Female | - |
dc.subject | Pelvis | - |
dc.subject | Artifacts | - |
dc.title | Qualitative and quantitative comparison of image quality between single-shot echo-planar and interleaved multi-shot echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging in female pelvis | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.identifier.email | Lee, EYP: eyplee77@hku.hk | - |
dc.identifier.authority | Lee, EYP=rp01456 | - |
dc.description.nature | published_or_final_version | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s00330-019-06491-3 | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 31822971 | - |
dc.identifier.pmcid | PMC7062860 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85076369604 | - |
dc.identifier.hkuros | 312771 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 30 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 1876 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 1884 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000519659200008 | - |
dc.publisher.place | Germany | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 0938-7994 | - |