Top

Published in:

01-08-2015 | BREAST RADIOLOGY

Fat suppression techniques (STIR vs. SPAIR) on diffusion-weighted imaging of breast lesions at 3.0 T: preliminary experience

Authors: Sofia Brandão, Luísa Nogueira, Eduarda Matos, Rita Gouveia Nunes, Hugo Alexandre Ferreira, Joana Loureiro, Isabel Ramos

Published in: La radiologia medica | Issue 8/2015

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this work was to perform a qualitative and quantitative comparison of the performance of two fat suppression techniques on breast diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI).

Materials and methods

Fifty-one women underwent clinical breast magnetic resonance imaging, including DWI with short TI inversion recovery (STIR) and spectral attenuated inversion recovery (SPAIR). Four were excluded from the analysis due to image artefacts. Rating of fat suppression uniformity and lesion visibility were performed. Agreement between the two sequences was evaluated. Additionally, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values for normal gland, benign and malignant lesions were compared. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was also performed.

Results

From the 52 lesions found, 47 were detected by both sequences. DWI-STIR evidenced more homogeneous fat suppression (p = 0.03). Although these lesions were seen with both techniques, DWI-SPAIR evidenced higher score for lesion visibility in nine of them. SNR and CNR were comparable, except for SNR in benign lesions (p < 0.01), which was higher for DWI-SPAIR. Mean ADC values for lesions were similar. ADC for normal fibroglandular tissue was higher when using DWI-STIR (p = 0.006). Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and area under the curve values were alike: 84.0 % for both; 77.3, 71.4 %; 80.9, 78.3 %; 82.5, 81.3 % for DWI-SPAIR and DWI-STIR, respectively.

Conclusion

DWI-STIR showed superior fat suppression homogeneity. No differences were found for SNR and CNR, except for SNR in benign lesions. ADCs for lesions were comparable. Findings in this study are consistent with previous studies at 1.5 T, meaning that both fat suppression techniques are appropriate for breast DWI at 3.0 T.

Available only for authorised users

Belli P, Costantini M, Bufi E et al (2010) Diffusion-weighted imaging in breast lesion evaluation. Radiol Med 115:51–69PubMedCrossRef

Jin G, An N, Jacobs MA, Li K (2010) The role of parallel diffusion-weighted imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) map values for evaluating breast lesions: preliminary results. Acad Radiol 17:456–463PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Woodhams R, Ramadan S, Stanwell P et al (2011) Diffusion-weighted imaging of the breast: principles and clinical applications. Radiographics 31:1059–1084PubMedCrossRef

Takahara T, Imai Y, Yamashita T et al (2004) Diffusion weighted whole body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS): technical improvement using free breathing, STIR and high resolution 3D display. Radiat Med 22:275–382PubMed

Kazama T, Nasu K, Kuroki Y et al (2009) Comparison of diffusion-weighted images using short inversion time inversion recovery or chemical shift selective pulse as fat suppression in patients with breast cancer. Jpn J Radiol 27:163–167PubMedCrossRef

Bitar R, Leung G, Perng R et al (2006) MR pulse sequences: what every radiologist wants to know but is afraid to ask. Radiographics 26:513–537PubMedCrossRef

Ribeiro MM, Rumor L, Oliveira M et al (2013) STIR, SPIR and SPAIR techniques in magnetic resonance of the breast: a comparative study. JBiSE 6:395–402CrossRef

Tannús A, Garwood M (1997) Adiabatic pulses. NMR Biomed 10:423–434PubMedCrossRef

Luna A, Ribes R, Soto JA (2012) Diffusion MRI outside the brain: a case-based review and clinical applications. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, New YorkCrossRef

10.

Woodhams R, Matsunaga K, Kan S et al (2005) ADC mapping of benign and malignant breast tumors. Magn Reson Med Sci 4:35–42PubMedCrossRef

11.

Guo Y, Cai YQ, Cai ZL et al (2002) Differentiation of clinically benign and malignant breast lesions using diffusion-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 16:172–178PubMedCrossRef

12.

Partridge SC, McKinnon GC, Henry RG, Hylton NM (2001) Menstrual cycle variation of apparent diffusion coefficients measured in the normal breast using MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 14:433–438PubMedCrossRef

13.

Lee J, Lustig M, Kim DH, Pauly JM (2009) Improved shim method based on the minimization of the maximum off-resonance frequency for balanced steady-state free precession (bSSFP). Magn Reson Med 61:1500–1506PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

14.

Agrawal G, Su MY, Nalcioglu O et al (2009) Significance of breast lesion descriptors in the ACR BI-RADS MRI lexicon. Cancer 115:1363–1380PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

15.

Heverhagen JT (2007) Noise measurement and estimation in MR imaging experiments. Radiology 245(3):638–639PubMedCrossRef

16.

Bogner W, Gruber S, Pinker K et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted MR for differentiation of breast lesions at 3.0 T: how does selection of diffusion protocols affect diagnosis? Radiology 253:341–351PubMedCrossRef

17.

Rahbar H, Partridge SC, Eby PR et al (2011) Characterization of ductal carcinoma in situ on diffusion weighted breast MRI. Eur Radiol 21:2011–2019PubMedCrossRef

18.

Altman DG (1991) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman & Hall, London

19.

Matsuoka A, Minato M, Harada M et al (2008) Comparison of 3.0-and 1.5-tesla diffusion-weighted imaging in the visibility of breast cancer. Radiat Med 26:15–20PubMedCrossRef

20.

Lourenço AP, Donegan L, Kahil H, Mainiero MB (2014) Improving outcomes of screening breast MRI with practice evolution: initial clinical experience with 3T compared to 1.5T. J Magn Reson Imaging 39:535–539PubMedCrossRef

21.

Rahbar H, Partridge SC, DeMartini WB et al (2013) Clinical and technical considerations for high quality breast MRI at 3 Tesla. J Magn Reson Imaging 37:778–790PubMedCrossRef

22.

Butler RS, Chen C, Vashi R et al (2013) 3.0 Tesla vs 1.5 Tesla breast magnetic resonance imaging in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. World J Radiol 5:285–294PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

23.

Mürtz P, Kaschner M, Träber F et al (2012) Evaluation of dual-source parallel RF excitation for diffusion-weighted whole-body MR imaging with background body signal suppression at 3.0 T. Eur J Radiol 81:3614–3623PubMedCrossRef

24.

Rahbar H, Partridge SC, DeMartini WB et al (2012) Improved B1 homogeneity of 3 Tesla breast MRI using dual-source parallel radiofrequency excitation. J Magn Reson Imaging 35:1222–1226PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

25.

Kuroki Y, Nasu K (2008) Advances in breast MRI: diffusion-weighted imaging of the breast. Breast Cancer 15:212–217PubMedCrossRef

26.

Kuroki S, Kuroki Y, Nasu K et al (2007) Detecting breast cancer with non-contrast MR imaging: combining diffusion-weighted and STIR imaging. Magn Reson Med Sci 6:21–27PubMedCrossRef

27.

Thomassin-Naggara I, De Bazelaire C, Chopier J et al (2013) Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of the breast: advantages and pitfalls. Eur J Radiol 82:435–443PubMedCrossRef

28.

Partridge SC, Singer L, Sun R et al (2011) Diffusion-weighted MRI: influence of intravoxel fat signal and breast density on breast tumor conspicuity and apparent diffusion coefficient measurements. Magn Reson Imaging 29:1215–1221PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

29.

Udayasankar UK, Martin D, Lauenstein T et al (2008) Role of spectral presaturation attenuated inversion-recovery fat-suppressed T2-weighted MR imaging in active inflammatory bowel disease. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:1133–1140PubMedCrossRef

30.

Takanaga M, Hayashi N, Miyati T et al (2012) Influence of b-value on the measurement of contrast and apparent diffusion coefficient in 3.0 Tesla breast magnetic resonance imaging. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 68:201–208PubMedCrossRef

31.

Lo GG, Ai V, Chan JK, Li KW et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of breast lesions: first experiences at 3 T. J Comput Assist Tomogr 33:63–69PubMedCrossRef

32.

Sonmez G, Cuce F, Mutlu H et al (2011) Value of diffusion-weighted MRI in the differentiation of benign and malign breast lesions. Wien Klin Wochenschr 123:655–661PubMedCrossRef

33.

Tsushima Y, Takahashi-Taketomi A, Endo K (2009) Magnetic resonance (MR) differential diagnosis of breast tumors using apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) on 1.5-T. J Magn Reson Imaging 30:249–255PubMedCrossRef

34.

Chen X, Li WL, Zhang YL et al (2010) Meta-analysis of quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the differential diagnosis of breast lesions. BMC Cancer 10:693PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

35.

Inoue K, Kozawa E, Mizukoshi W et al (2011) Usefulness of diffusion-weighted imaging of breast tumors: quantitative and visual assessment. Jpn J Radiol 29:429–436PubMedCrossRef

36.

Palle L, Reddy B (2009) Role of diffusion MRI in characterizing benign and malignant breast lesions. Indian J Radiol Imaging 19:287–290PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

37.

Woodhams R, Kakita S, Hata H et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted imaging of mucinous carcinoma of the breast: evaluation of apparent diffusion coefficient and signal intensity in correlation with histologic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:260–266PubMedCrossRef

38.

Pereira FP, Martins G, Carvalhaes de Oliveira RV (2011) Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 19:95–110PubMedCrossRef

39.

Baltzer PAT, Dietzal M, Vag T (2009) Diffusion weighted imaging—useful in all kinds of lesions? A systematic review. Eur Radiol 19:S765–S769CrossRef

40.

Hatakenaka M, Soeda H, Yabuuchi H et al (2008) Apparent diffusion coefficients of breast tumors: clinical application. Magn Reson Med Sci 7:23–29PubMedCrossRef

41.

Iima M, Le Bihan D, Okumura R et al (2011) Apparent diffusion coefficient as an MR imaging biomarker of low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ: a pilot study. Radiology 260:364–372PubMedCrossRef

42.

Nagy Z, Weiskopf N (2008) Efficient fat suppression by slice-selection gradient reversal in twice-refocused diffusion encoding. Magn Reson Med 60:1256–1260PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Title: Fat suppression techniques (STIR vs. SPAIR) on diffusion-weighted imaging of breast lesions at 3.0 T: preliminary experience
Authors: Sofia Brandão
Luísa Nogueira
Eduarda Matos
Rita Gouveia Nunes
Hugo Alexandre Ferreira
Joana Loureiro
Isabel Ramos
Publication date: 01-08-2015
Publisher: Springer Milan
Published in: La radiologia medica / Issue 8/2015
Print ISSN: 0033-8362
Electronic ISSN: 1826-6983
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-015-0508-2

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Fat suppression techniques (STIR vs. SPAIR) on diffusion-weighted imaging of breast lesions at 3.0 T: preliminary experience

Abstract

Purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 8/2015

The clinical application of 320-detector row CT in transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) for hepatocellular carcinoma

Incidental physiological sliding hiatal hernia: a single center comparison study between CT with water enema and CT colonography

Selective transarterial radioembolisation of unresectable liver-dominant colorectal cancer refractory to chemotherapy

Reproducibility of retrobulbar blood flow velocity measurements in normal subjects using two different CDI devices

Assessment of atrial diastolic function in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy by cine magnetic resonance imaging

Giant cell tumour of tendon sheath with bone invasion in extremities: analysis of clinical and imaging findings