|
KMID : 1001220140160010013
|
|
Journal of the Korean Society of Digital Medical Imaging Technology
2014 Volume.16 No. 1 p.13 ~ p.19
|
|
|
Patients with brain metastases the usefulness of contrast-enhanced FLAIR images after delay
|
|
Byun Jae-Hoo
Park Myung-Hwan
Lee Jin-Wan
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
Purpose: FLAIR image is beneficial for the diagnosis of various bran diseases including ischemic CVS, brain tumors and infections. However the border between the legion of brain metastasis and surrounding edema may not be clear. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the practical benefits of delayed imaging by comparing the image from a patient with brain metastasis before a contrast enhancement and the image 10 minutes after a contrast enhancement.
Materials and methods: Of the 92 people who underwent MRI brain metastases in suspected patients 13 people in three patients there is no video to target the 37 people confirmed cases, and motion artifacts brain metastases in our hospital June-December 2013, 18 people measurement position except for the three incorrect patient (male: 11 people, female: 7 people, average age: 60 years) in the target, test equipment, 3.0T MR System (ACHIEVA Release, Philips, I was 8ChannelSENSE Head Coil use Best, and the Netherlands). TR 11000 ms, TE 125 ms, TI2800 ms, Slice Thickness 5 mm, gap 5 mm, is a Slice number 21, the parameters of the 3D FFE, T2 FLAIR variable that was used to test, TR 8.1 ms, TE 3.7 ms, Slice number 240 I set to. The experiment was conducted by acquiring the FLAIR prior to contrast enhancement (heretofore referred to as Pre FLAIR), and acquiring the 3D FFE CE five minutes after the contrast enhancement, and recomposing the images in an axial plane of S/T 3mm, G 0mm (heretofore referred to as MPR TRA CE). Using the FLAIR 10 minutes after the contrast enhancement (heretofore referred to as Post FLAIR) and Pi-View, a retrospective study was conducted. Using MRIcro on the image of a patient confirmed for his diagnosis, the images before and after the contrast media, as well as the CNR and SNR of the MPR TRA CE images of the lesion and the site absent of lesion were compared and analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance.
Results: CNR for Pre FLAIR and Post FLAIR were 34.35 and 60.13, respectively, with MPR TRA CE at 23.77 showing no significant difference (p<0.050). Post-experiment analysis shows a difference between Pre FLAIR and Post FLAIR in terms of CNR (p<0.050), but no difference in CNR between Post FLAIR and MPR TRA CE (p>0.050), indicating that the contrast media had an effect only on Pre FLAIR and Post FLAIR. The SNR for the normal site Pre FLAIR was 106.43, and for the lesion site 140.79. Post FLAIR for the normal site was 107.79, and for the lesion site 167.91. MPR TRA CE for the normal site was 140.23 and for the lesion site 183.19, showing significant difference (p<0.050), and post-experiment analysis shows that there was a difference in SNR only on the lesion sites for Pre FLAIR and Post FLAIR (p<0.050). There was no difference in SNR between the normal site and lesion site for Post FLAIR and MPR TRA CE, indicating no effect from the contrast media (p>0.050).
Conclusions: This experiment shows that Post FLAIR has a higher contrast than Pre FLAIR, and a higher SNR for lesions, It was not not statistically significant and MPR TRA CE but CNR came out high. Inspection of post-contrast which is used in a high magnetic field is frequently used images of 3D T1 but, since the signal of the contrast medium and the blood flow is included, this method can be diagnostic accuracy is reduced, it is believed that when used in combination with Post FLAIR, and that can provide video information added to the diagnosis of brain metastases.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
FLAIR, Contrast Media, brain metastases, 3D FFE
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
|
|
|