|
Comparison between sagittal sequences in magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine with fat saturation and different phase encoding directions
|
M. Papaioannou   , A. Tsikrika , V. Roka , P. Lavda , N. Pantazis , G.K. Sakkas , E. Dardiotis , A. Bakas , P. Mavroidis , E. Lavdas |
|
|
|
Abstract: (319 Views) |
Background: Comparison of three different sagittal sequences with fat suppression in the lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), evaluating several image characteristics and changing the phase direction. Materials and Methods: Forty-five subjects (20 males, 25 females, mean age 50 years old) participated in this retrospective study in an MRI machine of 1.5 Tesla (GE Signa Hdx). We compared three fat-saturated sequences {T2 Weighted (T2W) Fast Spin Echo (FSE) Fat Saturation (FS) with phase direction superior-inferior (S/I), T2W Short Tau Inversion Recovery (STIR) with phase direction superior-inferior (S/I) and T2W STIR with phase direction (A/P)}. A qualitative analysis was performed, while two experienced radiologists evaluated the images. The statistical analysis was determined by Kruskal–Wallis non-parametric test. Results: The T2W FSE FS was superior in almost all studied parameters {total image quality, presence of artifacts, artifacts in 4th lumbar vertebra (L4) - 1st Sacral vertebra (S1), depiction of lesions on vertebral bodies, depiction of lesions on L4-S1 region, sharpness} in comparison with T2W STIR sequences with statistically significant difference (p<0.001). The STIR sequences exceeded the T2W FSE FS in the fat saturation effectiveness with a statistically significant difference (p<0.001). Conclusion: The T2 Weighted (T2W) Fast Spin Echo (FSE) Fat Saturation (FS) was superior in the depiction of pathology and normal anatomy, eliminating many artifacts in comparison with T2 Short Tau Inversion Recovery (STIR) sequences, especially in the L4 vertebra– S1 vertebra anatomic region, between three under-study sequences. Choosing the appropriate sagittal fat-saturated sequence in each clinical question is useful to avoid misdiagnosis due to technical artifacts. |
|
| Keywords: Lumbar spine MRI, fat suppression, image quality, artifact elimination, phase encoding direction. |
|
|
Full-Text [PDF 2610 kb]
(56 Downloads)
|
|
Type of Study: Original Research |
Subject:
Radiation Biology
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| References |
1. 1. Genu A, Koch G, Colin D, Aho S, Pearson E, Ben Salem D (2014) Factors influencing the occurrence of a T2-STIR hypersignal in the lumbosacral adipose tissue. Diagn Interv Imaging, 95: 283-8. [ DOI:10.1016/j.diii.2013.10.005] 2. Xu F, Li W, Liu D, Zhu D, Schär M, Myers K, Qin Q (2021) A novel spectrally selective fat saturation pulse design with robustness to B0 and B1 inhomogeneities: A demonstration on 3D T1-weighted breast MRI at 3 T. Magn Reson Imaging, 75: 156-61. [ DOI:10.1016/j.mri.2020.10.015] 3. Reicher M, Gold R, Halbach V, Rauschning W, Wilson G, Lufkin R (1986) MR imaging of the lumbar spine: anatomic correlations and the effects of technical variations. Am J Roentgenol, 147: 891-8. [ DOI:10.2214/ajr.147.5.891] 4. Guerini H, Omoumi P, Guichoux F, Vuillemin V, Morvan G, Zins M, Thevenin F, Drape JL (2015) Fat Suppression with Dixon techniques in musculoskeletal magnetic resonance imaging: A pictorial review. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol, 19: 335-47. [ DOI:10.1055/s-0035-1565913] 5. Delfaut EM, Beltran J, Johnson G, Rousseau J, Marchandise X, Cotten A (1999) Fat suppression in MR imaging: Techniques and pitfalls. RadioGraphics, 19: 373-82. [ DOI:10.1148/radiographics.19.2.g99mr03373] 6. Pui MH, Goh PS, Choo HF, Fok EC (1997) Magnetic resonance imaging of musculoskeletal lesions: comparison of three fat-saturation pulse sequences. Australas Radiol, 41: 99-102. [ DOI:10.1111/j.1440-1673.1997.tb00606.x] 7. Shapiro MD (2006) MR Imaging of the spine at 3T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am, 14: 97-108. [ DOI:10.1016/j.mric.2006.01.005] 8. D'Aprile P, Tarantino A, Jinkins JR, Brindicci D (2007) The value of fat saturation sequences and contrast medium administration in MRI of degenerative disease of the posterior/perispinal elements of the lumbosacral spine. Eur Radiol, 17: 523-31. [ DOI:10.1007/s00330-006-0324-0] 9. Kim JH, Kang WY, Cho BS, Yi KS (2016) A potential diagnostic pitfall in the differentiation of hemorrhagic and fatty lesions using short inversion time inversion recovery: a case report. Investig Magn Reson Imaging, 20: 181-4. [ DOI:10.13104/imri.2016.20.3.181] 10. Del Grande F, Santini F, Herzka DA, Aro MR, Dean CW, Gold GE, Carrino JA (2014) Fat-suppression techniques for 3-T MR Imaging of the musculoskeletal system. RadioGraphics, 34: 217-33. [ DOI:10.1148/rg.341135130] 11. Horger W and Kiefer B (2011) Fat suppression techniques - a Short Overview. 2. MAGNETOM Flash, 1/2011, www.siemens.com/magnetom-world: 56-59. 12. Zadig P, von Brandis E, Ording Müller LS, Tanturri de Horatio L, Rosendahl K, Avenarius DFM (2023) Pediatric whole-body magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of STIR and T2 Dixon sequences in the detection and grading of high signal bone marrow changes. Eur Radiol, 33(7):5045-5053. [ DOI:10.1007/s00330-023-09413-6] 13. Patel A, James SL, Davies AM, Botchu R (2015) Spinal imaging update. Bone Jt J, 97-B: 1683-92. [ DOI:10.1302/0301-620X.97B12.36164] 14. Lakadamyali H, Tarhan NC, Ergun T, Cakır B, Agıldere AM (2008) STIR sequence for depiction of degenerative changes in posterior stabilizing elements in patients with lower back pain. Am J Roentgenol, 191: 973-9. [ DOI:10.2214/AJR.07.2829] 15. Hennel F and Pruessmann KP (2017) MRI with phaseless encoding. Magn Reson Med, 78: 1029-37. [ DOI:10.1002/mrm.26497] 16. Morelli JN, Runge VM, Ai F, Attenberger U, Vu L, Schmeets SH, Nitz WR, Kirsch JE (2011) An Image-based Approach to Understanding the Physics of MR Artifacts. RadioGraphics, 31: 849-66. [ DOI:10.1148/rg.313105115] 17. Van Goethem JWM (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging of the spine. In: Reimer P, Parizel PM, Meaney JFM, Stichnoth FA (eds) Clinical MR Imaging, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp: 197-223. [ DOI:10.1007/978-3-540-74504-4_3] 18. Fair DA, Miranda-Dominguez O, Snyder AZ, Perrone A, Earl EA, Van AN, et al. (2020) Correction of respiratory artifacts in MRI head motion estimates. NeuroImage, 208: 116400. [ DOI:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116400] 19. Marchi L, Oliveira L, Amaral R, Fortti F, Pimenta L, Abdala N (2015) Morphometric study of the areolar space between the great vessels and the lumbar spine. Coluna/Columna, 14: 271-5. [ DOI:10.1590/S1808-185120151404152843] 20. Rafat Zand K, Reinhold C, Haider MA, Nakai A, Rohoman L, Maheshwari S (2007) Artifacts and pitfalls in MR imaging of the pelvis. J Magn Reson Imaging, 26: 480-97. [ DOI:10.1002/jmri.20996] 21. Marshman LAG, Strong G, Trewhella M, Kasis A, Friesem T (2010) Minimizing ferromagnetic artefact with metallic lumbar total disc arthroplasty devices at adjacent segments: technical note. Spine, 35: 252-6. [ DOI:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c838cc] 22. Hakky M, Pandey S, Kwak E, Jara H, Erbay SH (2013) Application of Basic Physics Principles to Clinical Neuroradiology: Differentiating Artifacts From True Pathology on MRI. Am J Roentgenol, 201: 369-77. [ DOI:10.2214/AJR.12.10394] 23. Dalto VF, Assad RL, Lorenzato MM, Crema MD, Louzada-Junior P, Nogueira-Barbosa MH (2020) Comparison between STIR and T2-weighted SPAIR sequences in the evaluation of inflammatory sacroiliitis: diagnostic performance and signal-to-noise ratio. Radiol Bras, 53: 223-8. [ DOI:10.1590/0100-3984.2019.0077] 24. Borg B, Modic MT, Obuchowski N, Cheah G (2011) Pedicle Marrow Signal Hyperintensity on Short Tau Inversion Recovery- and T2-Weighted Images: Prevalence and Relationship to Clinical Symptoms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 32: 1624-31. [ DOI:10.3174/ajnr.A2588] 25. Petersilge CA, Lewin JS, Duerk JL, Yoo JU, Ghaneyem AJ (1996) Optimizing imaging parameters for MR evaluation of the spine with titanium pedicle screws. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 166: 1213-8. [ DOI:10.2214/ajr.166.5.8615272] 26. Solórzano Espíndola E, Anzueto A (2018) Automatic Fuzzy contrast enhancement using Gaussian mixture models clustering: 7th International Congress, WITCOM 2018, Mazatlán, Mexico, November 5-9, 2018, Proceedings, pp: 120-34. [ DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-03763-5_11] 27. Nakatsu M, Hatabu H, Itoh H, Morikawa K, Miki Y, Kasagi K, Shimono T, Shoji K, et al. (2000) Comparison of short inversion time inversion recovery (STIR) and fat-saturated (chemsat) techniques for background fat intensity suppression in cervical and thoracic MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging JMRI, 11: 56-60.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1522-2586(200001)11:1<56::AID-JMRI8>3.0.CO;2-D [ DOI:10.1002/(SICI)1522-2586(200001)11:13.0.CO;2-D] 28. Vargas MI, Boto J, Meling TR (2021) Imaging of the spine and spinal cord: An overview of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques. Rev Neurol (Paris), 177: 451-8. [ DOI:10.1016/j.neurol.2020.07.005] 29. Lee C-C, Chen P-C, Chen H-H, Huang C-C, Lin L-H, Ng S-H, Chen M-C, Ko S-F (2017) Effectiveness of a tailored anterior saturation band in the improvement of the image quality of pelvic magnetic resonance for assessing rectal cancer. Clin Colorectal Cancer, 16: 187-94. [ DOI:10.1016/j.clcc.2017.01.010] 30. Alcaide-Leon P, Pauranik A, Alshafai L, Rawal S, Oh J, Montanera W, Leung G, Bharatha A (2016) Comparison of Sagittal FSE T2, STIR, and T1-Weighted Phase-Sensitive Inversion Recovery in the Detection of Spinal Cord Lesions in MS at 3T. Am J Neuroradiol, 37(5): 970-5. [ DOI:10.3174/ajnr.A4656] |
|
| Add your comments about this article |
|
|
|
|
Papaioannou M, Tsikrika A, Roka V, Lavda P, Pantazis N, Sakkas G, et al . Comparison between sagittal sequences in magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine with fat saturation and different phase encoding directions. Int J Radiat Res 2025; 23 (1) :127-133 URL: http://ijrr.com/article-1-5974-en.html
|
