Top

European Radiology

Published in:

Open Access 01-04-2020 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Magnetic Resonance

Qualitative and quantitative comparison of image quality between single-shot echo-planar and interleaved multi-shot echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging in female pelvis

Authors: He An, Xiaodong Ma, Ziyi Pan, Hua Guo, Elaine Yuen Phin Lee

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 4/2020

Abstract

Objectives

To qualitatively and quantitatively compare the image quality between single-shot echo-planar (SS-EPI) and multi-shot echo-planar (IMS-EPI) diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in female pelvis

Methods

This was a prospective study involving 80 females who underwent 3.0T pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). SS-EPI and IMS-EPI DWI were acquired with 3 b values (0, 400, 800 s/mm²). Two independent reviewers assessed the overall image quality, artifacts, sharpness, and lesion conspicuity based on a 5-point Likert scale. Regions of interest (ROI) were placed on the endometrium and the gluteus muscles to quantify the signal intensities and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and geometric distortion were quantified on both sequences. Inter-rater agreement was assessed using κ statistics and Kendall test. Qualitative scores were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test and quantitative parameters were compared with paired t test and Bland-Altman analysis.

Results

IMS-EPI demonstrated better image quality than SS-EPI for all aspects evaluated (SS-EPI vs. IMS-EPI: overall quality 3.04 vs. 4.17, artifacts 3.09 vs. 3.99, sharpness 2.40 vs. 4.32, lesion conspicuity 3.20 vs. 4.25; p < 0.001). Good agreement and correlation were observed between two reviewers (SS-EPI κ 0.699, r 0.742; IMS-EPI κ 0.702, r 0.789). IMS-EPI showed lower geometric distortion, SNR, and CNR than SS-EPI (p < 0.050). There was no significant difference in the mean ADC between the two sequences.

Conclusion

IMS-EPI showed better image quality with lower geometric distortion without affecting the quantification of ADC, though the SNR and CNR decreased due to post-processing limitations.

Key Points

• IMS-EPI showed better image quality than SS-EPI.

• IMS-EPI showed lower geometric distortion without affecting ADC compared with SS-EPI.

• The SNR and CNR of IMS-EPI decreased due to post-processing limitations.

Bakir B, Sanli S, Bakir VL et al (2017) Role of diffusion weighted MRI in the differential diagnosis of endometrial cancer, polyp, hyperplasia, and physiological thickening. Clin Imaging 41:86–94CrossRef

Angioli R, Plotti F, Capriglione S et al (2016) Preoperative local staging of endometrial cancer: the challenge of imaging techniques and serum biomarkers. Arch Gynecol Obstet 294:1291–1298CrossRef

Manoharan D, Das CJ, Aggarwal A, Gupta AK (2016) Diffusion weighted imaging in gynecological malignancies - present and future. World J Radiol 8:288–297CrossRef

Dietrich O, Biffar A, Baur-Melnyk A, Reiser MF (2010) Technical aspects of MR diffusion imaging of the body. Eur J Radiol 76:314–322CrossRef

Zhang Z, Huang F, Ma X, Xie S, Guo H (2015) Self-feeding MUSE: a robust method for high resolution diffusion imaging using interleaved EPI. Neuroimage 105:552–560CrossRef

Barentsz MW, Taviani V, Chang JM et al (2015) Assessment of tumor morphology on diffusion-weighted (DWI) breast MRI: diagnostic value of reduced field of view DWI. J Magn Reson Imaging 42:1656–1665CrossRef

Peng Y, Li Z, Tang H et al (2018) Comparison of reduced field-of-view diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and conventional DWI techniques in the assessment of rectal carcinoma at 3.0T: image quality and histological T staging. J Magn Reson Imaging 47:967–975CrossRef

Xie VB, Lyu M, Wu EX (2017) EPI Nyquist ghost and geometric distortion correction by two-frame phase labeling. Magn Reson Med 77:1749–1761CrossRef

Chang HC, Hui ES, Chiu PW, Liu X, Chen NK (2018) Phase correction for three-dimensional (3D) diffusion-weighted interleaved EPI using 3D multiplexed sensitivity encoding and reconstruction (3D-MUSER). Magn Reson Med 79:2702–2712CrossRef

10.

Ma X, Zhang Z, Dai E, Guo H (2016) Improved multi-shot diffusion imaging using GRAPPA with a compact kernel. Neuroimage 138:88–99CrossRef

11.

Wang Y, Ma X, Zhang Z et al (2018) A comparison of readout segmented EPI and interleaved EPI in high-resolution diffusion weighted imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 47:39–47CrossRef

12.

Dai E, Ma X, Zhang Z, Yuan C, Guo H (2017) Simultaneous multislice accelerated interleaved EPI DWI using generalized blipped-CAIPI acquisition and 3D K-space reconstruction. Magn Reson Med 77:1593–1605CrossRef

13.

Hu J, Li M, Dai Y et al (2018) Combining SENSE and reduced field-of-view for high-resolution diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Biomed Eng Online 17:77CrossRef

14.

van Rijssel MJ, Zijlstra F, Seevinck PR et al (2019) Reducing distortions in echo-planar breast imaging at ultrahigh field with high-resolution off-resonance maps. Magn Reson Med. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.27701

15.

Li L, Wang L, Deng M et al (2015) Feasibility study of 3-T DWI of the prostate: readout-segmented versus single-shot echo-planar imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205:70–76CrossRef

16.

Ihalainen T, Kuusela L, Soikkeli M, Lantto E, Ovissi A, Sipila O (2016) A body-sized phantom for evaluation of diffusion-weighted MRI data using conventional, readout-segmented, and zoomed echo-planar sequences. Acta Radiol 57:947–954CrossRef

17.

Forstner R, Thomassin-Naggara I, Cunha TM et al (2017) ESUR recommendations for MR imaging of the sonographically indeterminate adnexal mass: an update. Eur Radiol 27:2248–2257CrossRef

18.

Panyarak W, Chikui T, Yamashita Y, Kamitani T, Yoshiura K (2018) Image quality and ADC assessment in turbo spin-echo and echo-planar diffusion-weighted MR imaging of tumors of the head and neck. Acad Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2018.11.016

19.

Viera AJ, Garrett JM (2005) Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med 37:360–363PubMed

20.

Sohaib SA, Sahdev A, Van Trappen P, Jacobs IJ, Reznek RH (2003) Characterization of adnexal mass lesions on MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:1297–1304CrossRef

21.

Rosenkrantz AB, Chandarana H, Pfeuffer J et al (2015) Zoomed echo-planar imaging using parallel transmission: impact on image quality of diffusion-weighted imaging of the prostate at 3T. Abdom Imaging 40:120–126CrossRef

22.

Ota T, Hori M, Onishi H et al (2017) Preoperative staging of endometrial cancer using reduced field-of-view diffusion-weighted imaging: a preliminary study. Eur Radiol 27:5225–5235CrossRef

23.

Kim H, Lee JM, Yoon JH et al (2015) Reduced field-of-view diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the pancreas: comparison with conventional single-shot echo-planar imaging. Korean J Radiol 16:1216–1225CrossRef

24.

Lu Y, Hatzoglou V, Banerjee S et al (2015) Repeatability investigation of reduced field-of-view diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging on thyroid glands. J Comput Assist Tomogr 39:334–339CrossRef

25.

Feng Z, Min X, Sah VK et al (2015) Comparison of field-of-view (FOV) optimized and constrained undistorted single shot (FOCUS) with conventional DWI for the evaluation of prostate cancer. Clin Imaging 39:851–855CrossRef

26.

Tanaka T, Terai Y, Fujiwara S et al (2018) Preoperative diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and intraoperative frozen sections for predicting the tumor grade in endometrioid endometrial cancer. Oncotarget 9:36575–36584PubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Dong H, Li Y, Li H, Wang B, Hu B (2014) Study of the reduced field-of-view diffusion-weighted imaging of the breast. Clin Breast Cancer 14:265–271CrossRef

28.

Rechichi G, Galimberti S, Signorelli M et al (2011) Endometrial cancer: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient with tumor grade, depth of myometrial invasion, and presence of lymph node metastases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:256–262CrossRef

29.

Padhani AR, Liu G, Koh DM et al (2009) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging as a cancer biomarker: consensus and recommendations. Neoplasia 11:102–125CrossRef

30.

Utsunomiya D, Notsute S, Hayashida Y et al (2004) Endometrial carcinoma in adenomyosis: assessment of myometrial invasion on T2-weighted spin-echo and gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted images. AJR Am J Roentgenol 182:399–404CrossRef

31.

Park JJ, Kim CK, Park SY, Park BK, Kim B (2014) Value of diffusion-weighted imaging in predicting parametrial invasion in stage IA2-IIA cervical cancer. Eur Radiol 24:1081–1088CrossRef

32.

Thomeer MG, Vandecaveye V, Braun L et al (2019) Evaluation of T2-W MR imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging for the early post-treatment local response assessment of patients treated conservatively for cervical cancer: a multicentre study. Eur Radiol 29:309–318CrossRef

33.

Jalaguier-Coudray A, Villard-Mahjoub R, Delouche A et al (2017) Value of dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the detection of pathologic complete response in cervical cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: a retrospective observational study. Radiology 284:432–442CrossRef

34.

Deng L, Wang QP, Chen X, Duan XY, Wang W, Guo YM (2015) The combination of diffusion- and T2-weighted imaging in predicting deep myometrial invasion of endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 39:661–673CrossRef

35.

Setsompop K, Gagoski BA, Polimeni JR, Witzel T, Wedeen VJ, Wald LL (2012) Blipped-controlled aliasing in parallel imaging for simultaneous multislice echo planar imaging with reduced g-factor penalty. Magn Reson Med 67:1210–1224CrossRef

36.

Dai E, Zhang Z, Ma X et al (2018) The effects of navigator distortion and noise level on interleaved EPI DWI reconstruction: a comparison between image- and k-space-based method. Magn Reson Med 80:2024–2032CrossRef

Title: Qualitative and quantitative comparison of image quality between single-shot echo-planar and interleaved multi-shot echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging in female pelvis
Authors: He An
Xiaodong Ma
Ziyi Pan
Hua Guo
Elaine Yuen Phin Lee
Publication date: 01-04-2020
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 4/2020
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06491-3

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Qualitative and quantitative comparison of image quality between single-shot echo-planar and interleaved multi-shot echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging in female pelvis

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Key Points

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Key Points

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2020

Usefulness of imaging findings in predicting tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in patients with breast cancer

Preoperative prediction of tumour deposits in rectal cancer by an artificial neural network–based US radiomics model

Optimal timing for prediction of pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with diffusion-weighted MRI in patients with esophageal cancer

18F-FDG uptake velocity but not uptake level is associated with progression of carotid plaque

Quantitative mechanical dyssynchrony in dilated cardiomyopathy measured by deformable registration algorithm

Imaging of sarcopenia: old evidence and new insights