Quality Comparison of 3 Tesla multiparametric MRI of the prostate using a flexible surface receiver coil versus conventional surface coil plus endorectal coil setup

被引:10
作者
Ullrich, T. [1 ,3 ]
Kohli, M. D. [1 ]
Ohliger, M. A. [1 ]
Magudia, K. [1 ]
Arora, S. S. [4 ]
Barrett, T. [5 ,6 ]
Bittencourt, L. K. [7 ,8 ]
Margolis, D. J. [9 ]
Schimmoeller, L. [3 ]
Turkbey, B. [10 ]
Westphalen, A. C. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Radiol & Biomed Imaging, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[2] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Urol, San Francisco, CA USA
[3] Univ Dusseldorf, Med Fac, Dept Diagnost & Intervent Radiol, D-40225 Dusseldorf, Germany
[4] Vanderbilt Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Radiol & Radiol Sci, Nashville, TN 37232 USA
[5] Univ Cambridge, Addenbrookes Hosp, Dept Radiol, Cambridge, England
[6] Univ Cambridge, Addenbrookes Hosp, CamPARI Prostate Canc Grp, Cambridge, England
[7] DASA Co, Sao Paulo, Brazil
[8] Fluminense Fed Univ UFF, Dept Radiol, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil
[9] Weill Cornell Med, Dept Radiol, New York, NY USA
[10] NCI, Mol Imaging Program, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
关键词
MRI; Prostate cancer; Early diagnosis; Quality; DIFFUSION-WEIGHTED MRI; PELVIC PHASED-ARRAY; IMAGE-QUALITY; 3.0; T; CANCER; LOCALIZATION; DISTORTION;
D O I
10.1007/s00261-020-02641-0
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose To subjectively and quantitatively compare the quality of 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate acquired with a novel flexible surface coil (FSC) and with a conventional endorectal coil (ERC). Methods Six radiologists independently reviewed 200 pairs of axial, high-resolution T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted image data sets, each containing one examination acquired with the FSC and one with the ERC, respectively. Readers selected their preferred examination from each pair and assessed every single examination using six quality criteria on 4-point scales. Signal-to-noise ratios were measured and compared. Results Two readers preferred FSC acquisition (36.5-45%) over ERC acquisition (13.5-15%) for both sequences combined, and four readers preferred ERC acquisition (41-46%). Analysis of pooled responses for both sequences from all readers shows no significant preference for FSC or ERC. Analysis of the individual sequences revealed a pooled preference for the FSC in T2WI (38.7% vs 17.8%) and for the ERC in DWI (50.9% vs 19.6%). Patients' weight was the only weak predictor of a preference for the ERC acquisition (p= 0.04). SNR and CNR were significantly higher in the ERC acquisitions (p<0.001) except CNR differentiating tumor lesions from benign prostate (p=0.1). Conclusion Although readers have strong individual preferences, comparable subjective image quality can be obtained for prostate MRI with an ERC and the novel FSC. ERC imaging might be particularly valuable for sequences with inherently lower SNR as DWI and larger patients whereas the FSC is generally preferred in T2WI. FSC imaging generates a lower SNR than with an ERC.
引用
收藏
页码:4260 / 4270
页数:11
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]   Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study [J].
Ahmed, Hashim U. ;
Bosaily, Ahmed El-Shater ;
Brown, Louise C. ;
Gabe, Rhian ;
Kaplan, Richard ;
Parmar, Mahesh K. ;
Collaco-Moraes, Yolanda ;
Ward, Katie ;
Hindley, Richard G. ;
Freeman, Alex ;
Kirkham, Alex P. ;
Oldroyd, Robert ;
Parker, Chris ;
Emberton, Mark .
LANCET, 2017, 389 (10071) :815-822
[2]  
Barth Borna K, 2019, Curr Urol, V12, P88, DOI 10.1159/000489425
[3]   Comparison of image quality and patient discomfort in prostate MRI: pelvic phased array coil vs. endorectal coil [J].
Barth, Borna K. ;
Cornelius, Alexander ;
Nanz, Daniel ;
Eberli, Daniel ;
Donati, Olivio F. .
ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2016, 41 (11) :2218-2226
[4]   Diffusion-Weighted Imaging of the Prostate Image Quality and Geometric Distortion of Readout-Segmented Versus Selective-Excitation Accelerated Acquisitions [J].
Barth, Borna K. ;
Cornelius, Alexander ;
Nanz, Daniel ;
Eberli, Daniel ;
Donati, Olivio F. .
INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 2015, 50 (11) :785-791
[5]   T2-and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 3 T for the detection of prostate cancer with and without endorectal coil: An intraindividual comparison of image quality and diagnostic performance [J].
Baur, Alexander D. J. ;
Daqqaq, Tareef ;
Wagner, Moritz ;
Maxeiner, Andreas ;
Huppertz, Alexander ;
Renz, Diane ;
Hamm, Bernd ;
Fischer, Thomas ;
Durmus, Tahir .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2016, 85 (06) :1075-1084
[6]   Noise-Compensated, Bias-Corrected Diffusion Weighted Endorectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging via a Stochastically Fully-Connected Joint Conditional Random Field Model [J].
Boroomand, Ameneh ;
Shafiee, Mohammad Javad ;
Khalvati, Farzad ;
Haider, Masoom A. ;
Wong, Alexander .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING, 2016, 35 (12) :2587-2597
[7]  
Costa DN, 2016, UROL ONCOL, V34, DOI DOI 10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.02.009
[8]   ESUR/ESUI consensus statements on multi-parametric MRI for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer: quality requirements for image acquisition, interpretation and radiologists' training [J].
de Rooij, Maarten ;
Israel, Bas ;
Tummers, Marcia ;
Ahmed, Hashim U. ;
Barrett, Tristan ;
Giganti, Francesco ;
Hamm, Bernd ;
Logager, Vibeke ;
Padhani, Anwar ;
Panebianco, Valeria ;
Puech, Philippe ;
Richenberg, Jonathan ;
Rouviere, Olivier ;
Salomon, Georg ;
Schoots, Ivo ;
Veltman, Jeroen ;
Villeirs, Geert ;
Walz, Jochen ;
Barentsz, Jelle O. .
EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2020, 30 (10) :5404-5416
[9]   Noise Estimation from Averaged Diffusion Weighted Images: Can Unbiased Quantitative Decay Parameters Assist Cancer Evaluation? [J].
Dikaios, Nikolaos ;
Punwani, Shonit ;
Hamy, Valentin ;
Purpura, Pierpaolo ;
Rice, Scott ;
Forster, Martin ;
Mendes, Ruheena ;
Taylor, Stuart ;
Atkinson, David .
MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE, 2014, 71 (06) :2105-2117
[10]   Impact of the use of an endorectal coil for 3 T prostate MRI on image quality and cancer detection rate [J].
Gawlitza, Josephin ;
Reiss-Zimmermann, Martin ;
Thoermer, Gregor ;
Schaudinn, Alexander ;
Linder, Nicolas ;
Garnov, Nikita ;
Horn, Lars-Christian ;
Minh, Do Hoang ;
Ganzer, Roman ;
Stolzenburg, Jens-Uwe ;
Kahn, Thomas ;
Moche, Michael ;
Busse, Harald .
SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2017, 7