These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Three-dimensional MR Cholangiopancreatography in a Breath Hold with Sparsity-based Reconstruction of Highly Undersampled Data.
    Author: Chandarana H, Doshi AM, Shanbhogue A, Babb JS, Bruno MT, Zhao T, Raithel E, Zenge MO, Li G, Otazo R.
    Journal: Radiology; 2016 Aug; 280(2):585-94. PubMed ID: 26982678.
    Abstract:
    Purpose To develop a three-dimensional breath-hold (BH) magnetic resonance (MR) cholangiopancreatographic protocol with sampling perfection with application-optimized contrast using different flip-angle evolutions (SPACE) acquisition and sparsity-based iterative reconstruction (SPARSE) of prospectively sampled 5% k-space data and to compare the results with conventional respiratory-triggered (RT) acquisition. Materials and Methods This HIPAA-compliant prospective study was institutional review board approved. Twenty-nine patients underwent conventional RT SPACE and BH-accelerated SPACE acquisition with 5% k-space sampling at 3 T. Spatial resolution and other parameters were matched when possible. BH SPACE images were reconstructed by enforcing joint multicoil sparsity in the wavelet domain (SPARSE-SPACE). Two board-certified radiologists independently evaluated BH SPARSE-SPACE and RT SPACE images for image quality parameters in the pancreatic duct and common bile duct by using a five-point scale. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare BH SPARSE-SPACE and RT SPACE images. Results Acquisition time for BH SPARSE-SPACE was 20 seconds, which was significantly (P < .001) shorter than that for RT SPACE (mean ± standard deviation, 338.8 sec ± 69.1). Overall image quality scores were higher for BH SPARSE-SPACE than for RT SPACE images for both readers for the proximal, middle, and distal pancreatic duct, but the difference was not statistically significant (P > .05). For reader 1, distal common bile duct scores were significantly higher with BH SPARSE-SPACE acquisition (P = .036). More patients had acceptable or better overall image quality (scores ≥ 3) with BH SPARSE-SPACE than with RT SPACE acquisition, respectively, for the proximal (23 of 29 [79%] vs 22 of 29 [76%]), middle (22 of 29 [76%] vs 18 of 29 [62%]), and distal (20 of 29 [69%] vs 13 of 29 [45%]) pancreatic duct and the proximal (25 of 28 [89%] vs 22 of 28 [79%]) and distal (25 of 28 [89%] vs 24 of 28 [86%]) common bile duct. Conclusion BH SPARSE-SPACE showed similar or superior image quality for the pancreatic and common duct compared with that of RT SPACE despite 17-fold shorter acquisition time. (©) RSNA, 2016.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]