Rapid isotropic resolution cartilage assessment using radial alternating repetition time balanced steady‐state free‐precession imaging. Issue 4 (22nd October 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Al saleh, Habib; Hernandez, Larry; Lee, Kenneth S.; Rosas, Humberto G.; Block, Walter F.; Kijowski, Richard
• Is Part Of: Journal of magnetic resonance imaging. Volume 40:Issue 4(2014)
• Page Start: 796
• Page End: 803
• Publication Date: 2013-10-22
• Subjects: Magnetic resonance imaging -- Periodicals; 616
• DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24425
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1053-1807

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec id="jmri24425-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Purpose</title> <p>To compare a balanced steady‐state free‐precession sequence with a radial <italic>k</italic>‐space trajectory and alternating repetition time fat suppression (Radial‐ATR) with other currently used fat‐suppressed 3D sequences for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint at 3.0T.</p> </sec> <sec id="jmri24425-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Materials and Methods</title> <p>Radial‐ATR, fast spin‐echo (FSE‐Cube), gradient recall‐echo acquired in the steady‐state (GRASS), and spoiled gradient recall‐echo (SPGR) sequences with similar voxel volumes and identical scan times were performed at 3.0T on both knee joints of five volunteers. Signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) and contrast‐to‐noise ratio (CNR) measurements were performed for all sequences using a double acquisition method and compared using Mann–Whitney Wilcoxon tests. Radial‐ATR sequences with 0.3 mm and 0.4 mm isotropic resolution were also performed on the knee joints of seven volunteers and three patients with osteoarthritis.</p> </sec> <sec id="jmri24425-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>Average SNR values for cartilage, synovial fluid, and bone marrow were 54.7, 153.3, and 12.9, respectively, for Radial ATR, 30.8, 44.1, and 1.9, respectively, for FSE‐Cube, 13.3, 46.9, and 3.3, respectively, for GRASS, and 19.1, 8.1, and 2.1, respectively, for SPGR. Average CNR values between cartilage and synovial fluid and between cartilage and bone marrow were 98.6 and 41.8, respectively, for VIPR‐ATR, 13.4 and 28.8, respectively, for FSE‐Cube, 33.6 and 10.0, respectively, for GRASS, and 11.0 and 16.9, respectively, for SPGR. Radial‐ATR had significantly higher (<italic>P</italic> < 0.001) cartilage, synovial fluid, and bone marrow SNR and significantly higher (<italic>P</italic> < 0.01) CNR between cartilage and synovial fluid and between cartilage and bone marrow than FSE‐Cube, GRASS, and SPGR. Radial‐ATR provided excellent visualization of articular cartilage at high isotropic resolution with no image degradation due to off‐resonance banding artifacts.</p> </sec> <sec id="jmri24425-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusion</title> <p>Radial‐ATR had superior SNR efficiency to other fat‐suppressed 3D cartilage imaging sequences and produced high isotropic resolution images of the knee joint which could be used for evaluating articular cartilage at 3.0T. <bold>J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2014;40:796–803</bold>. © <bold>2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc</bold>.</p> </sec> </abstract>