Speeding up the clinical routine: Compressed sensing for 2D imaging of lumbar spine disc herniation. Issue 140 (July 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bratke, Grischa; Rau, Robert; Kabbasch, Christoph; Zäske, Charlotte; Maintz, David; Haneder, Stefan; Große Hokamp, Nils; Persigehl, Thorsten; Siedek, Florian; Weiss, Kilian
• Is Part Of: European journal of radiology. Issue 140(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-07
• Subjects: aCNR apparent contrast-to-noise ratio -- aSNR apparent signal-to-noise ratio -- CSF cerebrospinal fluid -- CS Compressed Sensing -- CS-SENSE combination of compressed sensing and SENSE -- CS-Auto combination of CS-SENSE with autocalibration -- RMSE root mean square error -- SSIM structural similarity index; Acceleration -- Magnetic resonance imaging -- Lumbar vertebrae -- Image processing -- Prospective studies; Medical radiology -- Periodicals; Radiology -- Periodicals; Radiologie médicale -- Périodiques; Medical radiology; Periodicals; 616.075705
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109738
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0720-048X

Abstract

Highlights: Combining CS with SENSE and TSE prescan allows the greatest possible reduction of scan time for 2D lumbar imaging (-43 %). CS-SENSE TSE is superior to SENSE as well as to reconstructions using GRE or autocalibration. The TSE prescan can also be used for all following sequences and thus allows a further reduction of the protocol duration. Abstract: Purpose: Increasing economic pressure and patient demands for comfort require an ever-increasing acceleration of scan times without compromising diagnostic certainty. This study tested the new acceleration technique Compressed SENSE (CS-SENSE) as well as different reconstruction methods for the lumbar spine. Methods: In this prospective study, 10 volunteers and 14 patients with lumbar disc herniation were scanned using a sagittal 2D T2 turbo spin echo (TSE) sequence applying different acceleration factors of SENSE and CS-SENSE. Gradient echo (GRE), autocalibration (CS-Auto) and TSE prescans were tested for reconstruction. Images were analysed by two readers regarding anatomical delineation, diagnostic certainty (for patients only) and image quality as well as objectively calculating the root mean square error (RMSE), structural similarity index (SSIM), SNR and CNR. The Friedman test and Chi-squared were used for ordinal, ANOVA for repeated measurements and Tukey Kramer test for continuous data. Cohen's kappawas calculated for interreader reliability. Results: CS-SENSE outperformed SENSE and CS-Auto regarding RMSE (e.g. CS-SENSE 1.5: 43.03 ± 11.64 versus SENSE 1.5: 80.41 ± 17.66; p = 0.0038) and SSIM as well as in the subjective rating for CS-SENSE 3 TSE. In the patient setting image quality was unchanged in all subjective criteria up to CS-SENSE 3 TSE (all p > 0.05) compared to standard T2 with 43 % less scan time while the GRE prescan only allowed a reduction of 32 %. Conclusion: Combining a TSE prescan with CS-SENSE enables significant scan time reductions with unchanged ratings for lumbar spine disc herniation making this superior to the currently used SENSE acceleration or GRE reconstructions.