4.5 Article

High-resolution intracranial vessel wall imaging using 3D CUBE T1 weighted sequence

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY
卷 85, 期 4, 页码 803-807

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.01.014

关键词

Vessel wall imaging; Intracranial artery; Magnetic resonance imaging; Three-dimensional imaging; T1 weighted imaging; High-resolution

资金

  1. National Health and Family Planning Commission of the People's Republic of China, within the program Health Industry Special Scientific Research Project [201402019]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To evaluate the feasibility of high-resolution 3D CUBE T1WI for intracranial vessel wall imaging. Methods: High-resolution 3D CUBE T1 weighted intracranial vessel wall images (0.4 mm x 0.4 mm x 0.4 mm) of 50 patients were retrospectively evaluated. A 5-point scale (1 poor, 5 excellent) was used to score the imaging quality for displaying the vessel wall of every intracranial artery segments. The inter-observer and intra-observer reproducibility of identifying plaques, intraplaque hemorrhage/luminal thrombosis, and wall enhancement were calculated. Results: Totally 893 artery segments were evaluated. 3D CUBE T1WI displayed the arteries wall and lumen clearly, with the highest score (4.920 +/- 0.837) for the C6-7 segments and the lowest (3.370 +/- 1.107) for the C3 segments of the internal carotid artery (ICA). Both intra-observer and inter-observer reproducibility were high for identification of normal walls (kappa = 0.928, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.891-0.954; kappa = 0.911, CI 0.868-0.940), plaque (kappa = 0.924, CI 0.884-0.954; kappa = 0.907, CI 0.866-0.943), luminal thrombosis (kappa = 1.000, CI 1.000-1.000; kappa = 1.000, CI 1.000-1.000), and wall enhancement (kappa = 1.000, CI 1.000-1.000; kappa = 0.914, CI 0.863-0.961). Conclusions: High-resolution 3D CUBE T1WI displayed intracranial wall and lumen clearly, and detected intracranial artery abnormalities with high reproducibility. (c) 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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