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: Image quality at synthetic brain magnetic resonance imaging in children.
    Author: Lee SM, Choi YH, Cheon JE, Kim IO, Cho SH, Kim WH, Kim HJ, Cho HH, You SK, Park SH, Hwang MJ.
    Journal: Pediatr Radiol; 2017 Nov; 47(12):1638-1647. PubMed ID: 28638982.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The clinical application of the multi-echo, multi-delay technique of synthetic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) generates multiple sequences in a single acquisition but has mainly been used in adults. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the image quality of synthetic brain MR in children compared with that of conventional images. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine children (median age: 6 years, range: 0-16 years) underwent synthetic and conventional imaging. Synthetic (T2-weighted, T1-weighted and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery [FLAIR]) images with settings matching those of the conventional images were generated. The overall image quality, gray/white matter differentiation, lesion conspicuity and image degradations were rated on a 5-point scale. The relative contrasts were assessed quantitatively and acquisition times for the two imaging techniques were compared. RESULTS: Synthetic images were inferior due to more pronounced image degradations; however, there were no significant differences for T1- and T2-weighted images in children <2 years old. The quality of T1- and T2-weighted images were within the diagnostically acceptable range. FLAIR images showed greatly reduced quality. Gray/white matter differentiation was comparable or better in synthetic T1- and T2-weighted images, but poorer in FLAIR images. There was no effect on lesion conspicuity. Synthetic images had equal or greater relative contrast. Acquisition time was approximately two-thirds of that for conventional sequences. CONCLUSION: Synthetic T1- and T2-weighted images were diagnostically acceptable, but synthetic FLAIR images were not. Lesion conspicuity and gray/white matter differentiation were comparable to conventional MRI.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]