4.2 Article

Volume Quantification of Endo lymph after Intravenous Administration of a Single Dose of Gadolinium Contrast Agent: Comparison of 18-versus 8-minute Imaging Protocols

期刊

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICAL SCIENCES
卷 14, 期 4, 页码 257-262

出版社

JPN SOC MAGNETIC RESONANCE MEDICINE
DOI: 10.2463/mrms.2014-0118

关键词

endolymphatic hydrops; magnetic resonance imaging; temporal bone disease; volume quantification

资金

  1. Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS KAKENHI) [25293263, 24659562]
  2. Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare of Japan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: We measured the volume of the endolymphatic space by extending a previously proposed less observer-dependent method of area quantification and compared volume measurements obtained using long (18 min, Image A) and short (8 mm, Image B) scan times. Methods: We performed MR imaging of 40 ears in 20 patients with clinically suspected endolymphatic hydrops 4 hours after intravenous administration of single-dose gadolinium-based contrast material (IV-SD-GBCM). Two observers separately measured the ratio of the volume of the endolymph to that of total lymph in the cochlea and vestibule by extending the area ratio measurement method previously reported (Image A and B). The correlation between the values by Image A and B was calculated. Results: We observed a strong linear correlation between Images A and B in the cochlear images; the Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) was 0.928 for Observer A and 0.926 for Observer B (P < 0.001, for all). A strong linear correlation was also observed in the vestibular images; the Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) was 0.962 for Observer A and 0.968 for Observer B (P < 0.001, for all). Conclusion: Measurement of endolymphatic volume after IV-SD-GBCM may be feasible using an MR imaging protocol with a reduced scan time of 8 min This method might facilitate greater use of endolymphatic hydrops imaging in clinical applications.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据