阚晓婧
阜外华中心血管病医院 医学影像科
Background/Aim: The turbo spin-echo (TSE) sequence is widely used for musculoskeletal (MSK) imaging; however, its acquisition speed is limited and can be easily affected by motion artifacts. We aimed to evaluate whether the use of a simultaneous multi-slice TSE (SMS-TSE) sequence can accelerate MSK imaging while maintaining image quality when compared with the routine TSE sequence. Methods: We prospectively enrolled 71 patients [mean age, 37.43 ± 12.56 (range, 20-67) years], including 37 men and 34 women, to undergo TSE and SMS sequences. The total scanning times for the wrist, ankle and knee joint with routine sequence were 14.92, 13.97, and 13.48 min, respectively. For the SMS-TSE sequence, they were 7.52, 7.20, and 6.87 min. Quantitative parameters, including the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), were measured. Three experienced MSK imaging radiologists qualitatively evaluated the image quality of bone texture, cartilage, tendons, ligament, meniscus, and artifact using a 5-point evaluation system, and the diagnostic performance of the SMS-TSE sequences was evaluated. Results: Compared with the routine TSE sequences, the scanning time was lower by 49.60, 48.46, and 49.04% using SMS-TSE sequences for the wrist, ankle, and knee joints, respectively. For the SNR comparison, the SMS-TSE sequences were significantly higher than the routine TSE sequence for wrist (except for Axial-T2WI-FS), ankle, and knee joint MR imaging (all p < 0.05), but no statistical significance was obtained for the CNR measurement (all p > 0.05, except for Sag-PDWI-FS in ankle joint). For the wrist joint, the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 88.24, 100, and 92%. For the ankle joint, they were 100, 75, and 93.33%. For the knee joint, they were 87.50, 85.71, and 87.10%. Conclusion: The use of the SMS-TSE sequence in the wrist, ankle, and knee joints can significantly reduce the scanning time and show similar image quality when compared with the routine TSE sequence.
Frontiers in physiology 2021
BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the effects of different iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithms on coronary artery calcium (CAC) score quantification using the reduced radiation dose (RRD) protocol in an anthropomorphic phantom and in patients.METHODS:A thorax phantom, containing 9 calcification inserts with varying hydroxyapatite (HA) densities, was scanned with the reference protocol [120 kv, 80 mAs, filtered back projection (FBP)] and RRD protocol (120 kV, 20-80 mAs, 5 mAs interval) using a 256-slice computed tomography (CT) scanner. Raw data were reconstructed with different reconstruction algorithms [iDose4 levels 1-7 and iterative model reconstruction (IMR) levels 1-3]. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and Agatston score (AS) were calculated for each image series. The correction factor was derived from linear regression analysis between the reference image series and other image series with different parameters. Additionally, 40 patients were scanned with the RRD protocol (50 mAs) and reconstructed with FBP, iDose4 level 4, and IMR level 2. AS was calculated for the 3-group image series, and was corrected by applying a correction factor for the IMR group. The agreement of risk stratification with different reconstruction algorithms was also analyzed.RESULTS:For the phantom study, the iDose4 and IMR groups had significantly higher SNR and CNR than the FBP group (all P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the total AS after comparing image series reconstructed with iDose4 (level 1-7) and FBP (all P>0.05), while AS from the IMR (level 1-3) image series were lower than the FBP group (all P<0.05). The tube current of 50 mAs was determined for the clinical study, and the correction factor was 1.14. For the clinical study, the median AS from the iDose4 and IMR groups were both significantly lower compared to the FBP image series [(112.89 (63.01, 314.09), 113.22 (64.78, 364.95) vs. 118.59 (65.05, 374.48), both P<0.05]. After applying the correction factor, the adjusted AS from the IMR group was not significantly different from that of the FBP group [126.48 (69.62, 355.85) vs. 118.59 (65.05, 374.48), P=0.145]. Moreover, the agreement in risk stratification between FBP and IMR improved from 0.81 to 0.85.CONCLUSIONS:The RRD CAC scoring scan using the IMR reconstruction algorithm is clinically feasible, and a correction factor can help reduce the AS underestimation effect.
Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery 2021
