|
KMID : 0858520160200020088
|
|
Journal of the Korean Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
2016 Volume.20 No. 2 p.88 ~ p.94
|
|
|
Assessment of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging-FLAIR Mismatch: Comparison between Conventional FLAIR versus Shorter-Repetition-Time FLAIR at 3T
|
|
Goh Byeong-Ho
Kim Eung-Yeop
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
Purpose: Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) imaging can be obtained faster with shorter repletion time (TR), but it gets noisier. We hypothesized that shorter-TR FLAIR obtained at 3 tesla (3T) with a 32-channel coil may be comparable to conventional FLAIR. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic value between conventional FLAIR (TR = 9000 ms, FLAIR9000) and shorter-TR FLAIR (TR = 6000 ms, FLAIR6000) at 3T in terms of diffusion-weighted imaging-FLAIR mismatch.
Materials and Methods: We recruited 184 patients with acute ischemic stroke (28 patients < 4.5 hours) who had undergone 5-mm diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and two successive 5-mm FLAIR images (no gap; in-plane resolution, 0.9 × 0.9 mm) at 3T with a 32-channel coil. The acquisition times for FLAIR9000 and FLAIR6000 were 108 seconds (generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions [GRAPPA] = 2) and 60 seconds (GRAPPA = 3), respectively. Two radiologists independently assessed the paired imaging sets (DWI-FLAIR9000 and DWI-FLAIR6000) for the presence of matched hyperintense lesions on each FLAIR imaging. The signal intensity ratios (area of DWI lesion to contralateral normal-appearing region) on both FLAIR imaging sets were compared.
Results: DWI-FLAIR9000 mismatch was present in 39 of 184 (21.2%) patients, which was perfectly the same on FLAIR6000. Three of 145 patients (2%) with DWI-matched lesions on FLAIR9000 had discrepancy on FLAIR6000, showing no significant difference (P > 0.05). Interobserver agreement was excellent for both DWI-FLAIR9000 and DWI-FLAIR6000 (k = 0.904 and 0.883, respectively). Between the two FLAIR imaging sets, there was no significant difference of signal intensity ratio (mean, standard deviation; 1.25 ± 0.20; 1.24 ± 0.20, respectively) (P > 0.05).
Conclusion: For the determination of mismatch or match between DWI and FLAIR imaging, there is no significant difference between FLAIR9000 and FLAIR6000 at 3T with a 32-channel coil.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
Acute ischemic stroke, Magnetic resonance imaging, Diffusion-weighted imaging, Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
  
|
|