4.7 Article

Stimulated Echo Diffusion Tensor Imaging (STEAM-DTI) with Varying Diffusion Times as a Probe of Breast Tissue

期刊

JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
卷 45, 期 1, 页码 84-93

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.25376

关键词

-

资金

  1. Central Norway Regional Health Authority (RHA)
  2. Liaison Committee

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To explore the application of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) for breast tissue and breast pathologies using a stimulated-echo acquisition mode (STEAM) with variable diffusion times. Materials and Methods: In this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study, approved by the local institutional review board, eight patients and six healthy volunteers underwent an MRI examination at 3 Tesla including STEAM-DTI with several diffusion times ranging from 68.5 to 902.5 ms. A DTI model was fitted to the data for each diffusion time, and parametric maps of mean diffusivity, fractional anisotropy, axial diffusivity, and radial diffusivity were computed for healthy fibroglandular tissue (FGT) and lesions. The median value of radial diffusivity for FGT was fitted to a linear decay to obtain an estimation of the surface-to-volume ratio, from which the radial diameter was calculated. Results: For healthy FGT, radial diffusivity presented a linear decay with the square root of the diffusion time resulting in a range of estimated radial diameters from 202 to 496 mm, while axial diffusivity presented a nearly time-independent diffusion. Residual fat signal was reduced at longer diffusion times due to the shorter T1 of fat. Residual fat signal to the overall signal in the healthy volunteers' FGT was found to range from 2.39% to 2.55% (shortest mixing time), and from 0.40% to 0.51% (longest mixing time) for the b500 images. Conclusion: The use of variable diffusion times may provide an in vivo noninvasive tool to probe diffusion lengths in breast tissue and breast pathology, and might aid by improving fat suppression at longer diffusion times.

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

4.7
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