Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Pediatric Radiology 9/2013

01-09-2013 | Original Article

Comparison of respiratory-triggered 3-D fast spin-echo and single-shot fast spin-echo radial slab MR cholangiopancreatography images in children

Authors: Govind B. Chavhan, Abeer Almehdar, Rahim Moineddin, Sumeet Gupta, Paul S. Babyn

Published in: Pediatric Radiology | Issue 9/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The two most commonly performed magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) sequences, 3-D fast spin-echo (3-D FSE) and single-shot fast spin-echo radial slabs (radial slabs), have not been compared in children.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to compare 3-D FSE and radial slabs MRCP sequences on a 3-T scanner to determine their ability to show various segments of pancreaticobiliary tree and presence of artifacts in children.

Materials and methods

We reviewed 79 consecutive MRCPs performed in 74 children on a 3-T scanner. We noted visibility of major ducts on 3-D FSE and radial slabs. We noted the order of branching of ducts in the right and left hepatic ducts and the degree of visibility of the pancreatic duct. Statistical analysis was performed using McNemar and signed rank tests.

Results

There was no significant difference in the visibility of major bile ducts and the order of branching in the right hepatic lobe between sequences. A higher order of branching in the left lobe was seen on radial slabs than 3-D FSE (mean order of branching 2.82 versus 2.27; P-value = 0.0002). The visibility of pancreatic duct was better on radial slabs as compared to 3-D FSE (mean value of 1.53 vs. 0.90; P-value < 0.0001). 3-D FSE sequence was artifact‐free in 25/79 (31.6%) MRCP exams as compared to radial slabs, which were artifact-free in 18/79 (22.8%) MRCP exams (P-value = 0.0001).

Conclusion

There is no significant difference in the visibility of major bile ducts between 3-D FSE and radial slab MRCP sequences at 3-T in children. However, radial slab MRCP shows a higher order of branching in the left hepatic lobe and superior visibility of the pancreatic duct than 3-D FSE.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Chavhan GB, Babyn PS, Manson D et al (2008) Pediatric MR cholangiopancreatography: principles, technique, and clinical application. Radiographics 28:1951–1962PubMedCrossRef Chavhan GB, Babyn PS, Manson D et al (2008) Pediatric MR cholangiopancreatography: principles, technique, and clinical application. Radiographics 28:1951–1962PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Delaney L, Applegate KE, Karmazyn B et al (2008) MR cholangiopancreatography in children: feasibility, safety, and initial experience. Pediatr Radiol 38:64–75PubMedCrossRef Delaney L, Applegate KE, Karmazyn B et al (2008) MR cholangiopancreatography in children: feasibility, safety, and initial experience. Pediatr Radiol 38:64–75PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Tipnis NA, Dua KS, Werlin SL (2008) A retrospective assessment of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 46:59–64PubMedCrossRef Tipnis NA, Dua KS, Werlin SL (2008) A retrospective assessment of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 46:59–64PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Tipnis NA, Werlin SL (2007) The use of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in children. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 9:225–229PubMedCrossRef Tipnis NA, Werlin SL (2007) The use of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in children. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 9:225–229PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Chavhan GB, Roberts E, Moineddin R et al (2008) Primary sclerosing cholangitis in children: utility of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. Pediatr Radiol 38:868–873PubMedCrossRef Chavhan GB, Roberts E, Moineddin R et al (2008) Primary sclerosing cholangitis in children: utility of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. Pediatr Radiol 38:868–873PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Palmucci S, Mauro LA, Coppolino M et al (2010) Evaluation of the biliary and pancreatic system with 2D SSFSE, breathhold 3D FRFSE and respiratory-triggered 3D FRFSE sequences. Radiol Med 115:467–482PubMedCrossRef Palmucci S, Mauro LA, Coppolino M et al (2010) Evaluation of the biliary and pancreatic system with 2D SSFSE, breathhold 3D FRFSE and respiratory-triggered 3D FRFSE sequences. Radiol Med 115:467–482PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Masui T, Katayama M, Kobayashi S et al (2006) Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: comparison of respiratory-triggered three-dimensional fast-recovery fast spin-echo with parallel imaging technique and breath-hold half-Fourier two-dimensional single-shot fast spin-echo technique. Radiat Med 24:202–209PubMedCrossRef Masui T, Katayama M, Kobayashi S et al (2006) Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: comparison of respiratory-triggered three-dimensional fast-recovery fast spin-echo with parallel imaging technique and breath-hold half-Fourier two-dimensional single-shot fast spin-echo technique. Radiat Med 24:202–209PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Cova M, Stacul F, Cester G et al (2003) MR cholangiopancreatography: comparison of 2D single-shot fast spin-echo and 3D fast spin-echo sequences. Radiol Med 106:178–190PubMed Cova M, Stacul F, Cester G et al (2003) MR cholangiopancreatography: comparison of 2D single-shot fast spin-echo and 3D fast spin-echo sequences. Radiol Med 106:178–190PubMed
9.
go back to reference Sodickson A, Mortele KJ, Barish MA et al (2006) Three-dimensional fast-recovery fast spin-echo MRCP: comparison with two-dimensional single-shot fast spin-echo techniques. Radiology 238:549–559PubMedCrossRef Sodickson A, Mortele KJ, Barish MA et al (2006) Three-dimensional fast-recovery fast spin-echo MRCP: comparison with two-dimensional single-shot fast spin-echo techniques. Radiology 238:549–559PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Isoda H, Kataoka M, Maetani Y et al (2007) MRCP imaging at 3.0 T vs. 1.5 T: preliminary experience in healthy volunteers. J Magn Reson Imaging 25:1000–1006PubMedCrossRef Isoda H, Kataoka M, Maetani Y et al (2007) MRCP imaging at 3.0 T vs. 1.5 T: preliminary experience in healthy volunteers. J Magn Reson Imaging 25:1000–1006PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Arizono S, Isoda H, Maetani YS et al (2010) High spatial resolution 3D MR cholangiography with high sampling efficiency technique (SPACE): comparison of 3 T vs. 1.5 T. Eur J Radiol 73:114–118PubMedCrossRef Arizono S, Isoda H, Maetani YS et al (2010) High spatial resolution 3D MR cholangiography with high sampling efficiency technique (SPACE): comparison of 3 T vs. 1.5 T. Eur J Radiol 73:114–118PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Merkle EM, Haugan PA, Thomas J et al (2006) 3.0- versus 1.5-T MR cholangiography: a pilot study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:516–521PubMedCrossRef Merkle EM, Haugan PA, Thomas J et al (2006) 3.0- versus 1.5-T MR cholangiography: a pilot study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:516–521PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Onishi H, Kim T, Hori M et al (2009) MR cholangiopancreatography at 3.0 T: intraindividual comparative study with MR cholangiopancreatography at 1.5 T for clinical patients. Invest Radiol 44:559–565PubMedCrossRef Onishi H, Kim T, Hori M et al (2009) MR cholangiopancreatography at 3.0 T: intraindividual comparative study with MR cholangiopancreatography at 1.5 T for clinical patients. Invest Radiol 44:559–565PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Comparison of respiratory-triggered 3-D fast spin-echo and single-shot fast spin-echo radial slab MR cholangiopancreatography images in children
Authors
Govind B. Chavhan
Abeer Almehdar
Rahim Moineddin
Sumeet Gupta
Paul S. Babyn
Publication date
01-09-2013
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Pediatric Radiology / Issue 9/2013
Print ISSN: 0301-0449
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1998
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-013-2663-8

Other articles of this Issue 9/2013

Pediatric Radiology 9/2013 Go to the issue