4.5 Article

Comparison of PGSE and STEAM DTI acquisitions with varying diffusion times for probing anisotropic structures in human kidneys

Journal

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
Volume 84, Issue 3, Pages 1518-1525

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.28217

Keywords

DWI; FA map; kidney; PGSE; renal DTI; STEAM

Funding

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [408765040]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose To evaluate the sensitivity of stimulated-echo acquisition mode (STEAM) and pulsed-gradient spin-echo (PGSE) diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) acquisitions with different diffusion times for measuring renal tissue anisotropy. Methods Twelve healthy volunteers underwent an MRI examination at a 3T scanner including STEAM and PGSE DTI with variable diffusion times Delta (20.3, 37 and 125 ms). Three volunteers were scanned twice to test the reproducibility for repeated examinations. Diffusion parameters fractional anisotropy (FA) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in the automatically segmented cortical and medullary regions of interests in both kidneys were calculated and averaged over all subjects for further analysis. Moreover, 5-grade qualitative evaluation of the FA and ADC maps from each sequence was conducted by two experienced radiologists in a consensus. Results The cortex-medulla difference in the STEAM sequence was significantly higher than that in PGSE with short increment = 20.3 ms (P < 0.001) and in PGSE with intermediate increment = 37 ms (P < 0.05) diffusion times. Reproducibility of the FA/ADC measurements was very good and comparable for all acquisition modes investigated. For the FA maps, the PGSE sequence with intermediate diffusion time scored highest in the subjective visual assessment of radiologists. Conclusion The delineation of anisotropy in renal tissue is depending on the used diffusion time of the DTI sequence. A PGSE acquisition at a diffusion time of about 37 ms provides reproducible results with optimal corticomedullary contrast in FA and ADC maps and good image quality.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available