We have located links that may give you full text access.
Linearity, Bias, Intrascanner Repeatability, and Interscanner Reproducibility of Quantitative Multidynamic Multiecho Sequence for Rapid Simultaneous Relaxometry at 3 T: A Validation Study With a Standardized Phantom and Healthy Controls.
Investigative Radiology 2019 January
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the linearity, bias, intrascanner repeatability, and interscanner reproducibility of quantitative values derived from a multidynamic multiecho (MDME) sequence for rapid simultaneous relaxometry.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The NIST/ISMRM (National Institute of Standards and Technology/International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine) phantom, containing spheres with standardized T1 and T2 relaxation times and proton density (PD), and 10 healthy volunteers, were scanned 10 times on different days and 2 times during the same session, using the MDME sequence, on three 3 T scanners from different vendors. For healthy volunteers, brain volumetry and myelin estimation were performed based on the measured T1, T2, and PD. The measured phantom values were compared with reference values; volunteer values were compared with their averages across 3 scanners.
RESULTS: The linearity of both phantom and volunteer measurements in T1, T2, and PD values was very strong (R = 0.973-1.000, 0.979-1.000, and 0.982-0.999, respectively) The highest intrascanner coefficients of variation (CVs) for T1, T2, and PD were 2.07%, 7.60%, and 12.86% for phantom data, and 1.33%, 0.89%, and 0.77% for volunteer data, respectively. The highest interscanner CVs of T1, T2, and PD were 10.86%, 15.27%, and 9.95% for phantom data, and 3.15%, 5.76%, and 3.21% for volunteer data, respectively. Variation of T1 and T2 tended to be larger at higher values outside the range of those typically observed in brain tissue. The highest intrascanner and interscanner CVs for brain tissue volumetry were 2.50% and 5.74%, respectively, for cerebrospinal fluid.
CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative values derived from the MDME sequence are overall robust for brain relaxometry and volumetry on 3 T scanners from different vendors. Caution is warranted when applying MDME sequence on anatomies with relaxometry values outside the range of those typically observed in brain tissue.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The NIST/ISMRM (National Institute of Standards and Technology/International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine) phantom, containing spheres with standardized T1 and T2 relaxation times and proton density (PD), and 10 healthy volunteers, were scanned 10 times on different days and 2 times during the same session, using the MDME sequence, on three 3 T scanners from different vendors. For healthy volunteers, brain volumetry and myelin estimation were performed based on the measured T1, T2, and PD. The measured phantom values were compared with reference values; volunteer values were compared with their averages across 3 scanners.
RESULTS: The linearity of both phantom and volunteer measurements in T1, T2, and PD values was very strong (R = 0.973-1.000, 0.979-1.000, and 0.982-0.999, respectively) The highest intrascanner coefficients of variation (CVs) for T1, T2, and PD were 2.07%, 7.60%, and 12.86% for phantom data, and 1.33%, 0.89%, and 0.77% for volunteer data, respectively. The highest interscanner CVs of T1, T2, and PD were 10.86%, 15.27%, and 9.95% for phantom data, and 3.15%, 5.76%, and 3.21% for volunteer data, respectively. Variation of T1 and T2 tended to be larger at higher values outside the range of those typically observed in brain tissue. The highest intrascanner and interscanner CVs for brain tissue volumetry were 2.50% and 5.74%, respectively, for cerebrospinal fluid.
CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative values derived from the MDME sequence are overall robust for brain relaxometry and volumetry on 3 T scanners from different vendors. Caution is warranted when applying MDME sequence on anatomies with relaxometry values outside the range of those typically observed in brain tissue.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app