Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 6/2018

01-06-2018 | Magnetic Resonance

Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with GRASE sequence at 3.0T: does it improve image quality and acquisition time as compared with 3D TSE?

Authors: Morikatsu Yoshida, Takeshi Nakaura, Taihei Inoue, Shota Tanoue, Sentaro Takada, Daisuke Utsunomiya, Shota Tsumagari, Kazunori Harada, Yasuyuki Yamashita

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 6/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

The current study evaluated the clinical usefulness of the gradient and spin-echo (GRASE) sequence with single breath-hold in 3.0 T magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP). We compared the acquisition time and image quality between GRASE and breath navigator-triggered 3D turbo spin echo (3D TSE).

Methods

We examined 54 consecutive patients who underwent MRCP with GRASE and 3D TSE. We compared the image acquisition time and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) between the common bile duct (CBD) and liver. Overall image quality, blurring, motion artifacts and CBD visibility were scored on a 4-point scale by two radiologists. Paired t-tests were used to compare the variables.

Results

The mean image acquisition time was 95 % shorter with the GRASE than with 3D TSE (GRASE: 20 s; 3D TSE: 6 min 27 s). The CNR of GRASE was significantly higher than that of 3D TSE (GRASE: 25.4 ± 13.9 vs. 3D TSE: 18.2 ± 9.6, p < 0.01). All qualitative scores for GRASE were significantly better than those for 3D TSE.

Conclusions

3.0 T MRCP with GRASE sequence with single breath-hold significantly improved the CNR of CBD with a 95 % shorter acquisition time compared with conventional 3D MRCP with 3D TSE.

Key Points

• MRCP acquisition time was 95% shorter with GRASE than with 3D TSE.
• Overall image quality of GRASE was significantly better than 3D TSE.
• Pancreaticobiliary tree visibility with GRASE was better than that with 3D TSE.
Literature
1.
Mazziotti S, Costa C, Ascenti G, Gaeta M, Pandolfo A, Blandino A (2005) MR cholangiopancreatography diagnosis of juxtapapillary duodenal diverticulum simulating a cystic lesion of the pancreas: usefulness of an oral negative contrast agent. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185:432–435CrossRefPubMed
2.
Valls C, Alba E, Cruz M et al (2005) Biliary complications after liver transplantation: diagnosis with MR cholangiopancreatography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:812–820CrossRefPubMed
3.
Aube C, Delorme B, Yzet T et al (2005) MR cholangiopancreatography versus endoscopic sonography in suspected common bile duct lithiasis: a prospective, comparative study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:55–62CrossRefPubMed
4.
Asbach P, Klessen C, Kroencke TJ et al (2005) Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography using a free-breathing T2-weighted turbo spin-echo sequence with navigator-triggered prospective acquisition correction. Magn Reson Imaging 23:939–945CrossRefPubMed
5.
Kinner S, Dechene A, Ladd SC et al (2010) Comparison of different MRCP techniques for the depiction of biliary complications after liver transplantation. Eur Radiol 20:1749–1756CrossRefPubMed
6.
Morita S, Ueno E, Suzuki K et al (2008) Navigator-triggered prospective acquisition correction (PACE) technique vs. conventional respiratory-triggered technique for free-breathing 3D MRCP: an initial prospective comparative study using healthy volunteers. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:673–677CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zhang J, Israel GM, Hecht EM, Krinsky GA, Babb JS, Lee VS (2006) Isotropic 3D T2-weighted MR cholangiopancreatography with parallel imaging: feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:1564–1570CrossRefPubMed
8.
Schindera ST, Miller CM, Ho LM, DeLong DM, Merkle EM (2007) Magnetic resonance (MR) cholangiography: quantitative and qualitative comparison of 3.0 Tesla with 1.5 Tesla. Invest Radiol 42:399–405CrossRefPubMed
9.
Yokoyama K, Nakaura T, Iyama Y et al (2016) Usefulness of 3D hybrid profile order technique with 3T magnetic resonance cholangiography: comparison of image quality and acquisition time. J Magn Reson Imaging 44:1346–1353CrossRefPubMed
10.
Taylor AC, Little AF, Hennessy OF, Banting SW, Smith PJ, Desmond PV (2002) Prospective assessment of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for noninvasive imaging of the biliary tree. Gastrointest Endosc 55:17–22CrossRefPubMed
11.
Nandalur KR, Hussain HK, Weadock WJ et al (2008) Possible biliary disease: diagnostic performance of high-spatial-resolution isotropic 3D T2-weighted MRCP. Radiology 249:883–890CrossRefPubMed
12.
Feinberg DA, Oshio K (1991) GRASE (gradient- and spin-echo) MR imaging: a new fast clinical imaging technique. Radiology 181:597–602CrossRefPubMed
13.
Ba-Ssalamaha A, Schick S, Heimberger K et al (2000) Ultrafast magnetic resonance imaging of the brain. Magn Reson Imaging 18:237–243CrossRefPubMed
14.
Fernandez-Jimenez R, Sanchez-Gonzalez J, Aguero J et al (2015) Fast T2 gradient-spin-echo (T2-GraSE) mapping for myocardial edema quantification: first in vivo validation in a porcine model of ischemia/reperfusion. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 17:92CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Patel MR, Klufas RA, Shapiro AW (1995) MR imaging of diseases of the brain: comparison of GRASE and conventional spin-echo T2-weighted pulse sequences. AJR Am J Roentgenol 165:963–966CrossRefPubMed
16.
Rockwell DT, Melhem ER, Bhatia RG (1997) GRASE (gradient- and spin-echo) MR of the brain. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 18:1923–1928PubMed
17.
18.
Yoshikawa T, Mitchell DG, Hirota S et al (2006) Gradient- and spin-echo T2-weighted imaging for SPIO-enhanced detection and characterization of focal liver lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging 23:712–719CrossRefPubMed
19.
Yoshikawa T, Mitchell DG, Hirota S et al (2006) Focal liver lesions: breathhold gradient- and spin-echo T2-weighted imaging for detection and characterization. J Magn Reson Imaging 23:520–528CrossRefPubMed
20.
Baessler B, Schaarschmidt F, Stehning C, Schnackenburg B, Maintz D, Bunck AC (2015) Cardiac T2-mapping using a fast gradient echo spin echo sequence - first in vitro and in vivo experience. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 17:67CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Itatani R, Namimoto T, Kusunoki S, Mizuguchi T, Ohtsuka S, Yamashita Y (2016) Usefulness of the short-echo time cube sequence at 3-T magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: prospective comparison with the conventional 3-dimensional fast spin-echo sequence. J Comput Assist Tomogr 40:551–556CrossRefPubMed
22.
Hardy PA, Yue G (1997) Measurement of magnetic resonance T2 for physiological experiments. J Appl Physiol (1985) 83:904–911CrossRef
23.
Irie H, Honda H, Kuroiwa T et al (2001) Pitfalls in MR cholangiopancreatographic interpretation. Radiographics 21:23–37CrossRefPubMed
24.
Oshio K, Feinberg DA (1992) Single-shot GRASE imaging without fast gradients. Magn Reson Med 26:355–360CrossRefPubMed
25.
Isoda H, Maetani Y, Kataoka M et al (2008) Contrast behavior and image quality of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography imaging using variable echo times at 3.0 T. Clin Imaging 32:362–366CrossRefPubMed
26.
Jung G, Krahe T, Kugel H et al (1997) Prospective comparison of fast SE and GRASE sequences and echo planar imaging with conventional SE sequences in the detection of focal liver lesions at 1.0 T. J Comput Assist Tomogr 21:341–347CrossRefPubMed
27.
Lee VS, Krinsky GA, Nazzaro CA et al (2004) Defining intrahepatic biliary anatomy in living liver transplant donor candidates at mangafodipir trisodium-enhanced MR cholangiography versus conventional T2-weighted MR cholangiography. Radiology 233:659–666CrossRefPubMed
28.
Kim JH, Hong SS, Eun HW, Han JK, Choi BI (2012) Clinical usefulness of free-breathing navigator-triggered 3D MRCP in non-cooperative patients: comparison with conventional breath-hold 2D MRCP. Eur J Radiol 81:e513–e518CrossRefPubMed
29.
Liu K, Xie P, Peng W, Zhou Z (2015) Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: comparison of two- and three-dimensional sequences for the assessment of pancreatic cystic lesions. Oncol Lett 9:1917–1921CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with GRASE sequence at 3.0T: does it improve image quality and acquisition time as compared with 3D TSE?
Authors
Morikatsu Yoshida
Takeshi Nakaura
Taihei Inoue
Shota Tanoue
Sentaro Takada
Daisuke Utsunomiya
Shota Tsumagari
Kazunori Harada
Yasuyuki Yamashita
Publication date
01-06-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 6/2018
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-5240-y

Other articles of this Issue 6/2018

European Radiology 6/2018 Go to the issue

Radiological Education

Computed tomography use in a large Italian region: trend analysis 2004-2014 of emergency and outpatient CT examinations in children and adults

Interventional

Feasibility study of MR-guided transgluteal targeted in-bore biopsy for suspicious lesions of the prostate at 3 Tesla using a freehand approach

Magnetic Resonance

The PRICE study: The role of conventional and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in assessment of locally advanced cervical cancer patients administered by chemoradiation followed by radical surgery

Radiological Education

Determining procedures for simulation-based training in radiology: a nationwide needs assessment

Ultrasound

Use of the Kwak Thyroid Image Reporting and Data System (K-TIRADS) in differential diagnosis of thyroid nodules: systematic review and meta-analysis

Correction

Correction to: Morphological characteristics of chronic total occlusion: predictors of different strategies for long-segment femoral arterial occlusions