Three-dimensional isotropic T2-weighted cervical MRI at 3T: comparison with two-dimensional T2-weighted sequences.

AIM To compare three-dimensional (3D) isotropic T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences and reformation with two-dimensional (2D) T2-weighted sequences regarding image quality of the cervical spine at 3T. MATERIALS AND METHODS A phantom study was performed using a water-filled cylinder. The signal-to-noise and image homogeneity were evaluated. Fourteen (n=14) volunteers were examined at 3T using 3D isotropic T2-weighted sagittal and conventional 2D T2-weighted sagittal, axial, and oblique sagittal MRI. Multiplanar reformation (MPR) of the 3D T2-weighted sagittal dataset was performed simultaneously with image evaluation. In addition to artefact assessment, the visibility of anatomical structures in the 3D and 2D sequences was qualitatively assessed by two radiologists independently. Cohen's kappa and Wilcoxon signed rank test were used for the statistical analysis. RESULT The 3D isotropic T2-weighted sequence resulted in the highest signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and lowest non-uniformity (NU) among the sequences in the phantom study. Quantitative evaluation revealed lower NU values of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and muscles in 2D T2-weighted sagittal sequences compared to the 3D volume isotropic turbo spin-echo acquisition (VISTA) sequence. The other NU values revealed no statistically significant difference between the 2D turbo spin-echo (TSE) and 3D VISTA sequences (0.059<p<0.959). 3D VISTA images showed significantly fewer CSF flow artefacts (p<0.001) and better delineated intradural nerve rootlets (p=0.001) and neural foramina (p=0.016) compared to 2D sequences. CONCLUSION A 3D T2 weighted sequence is superior to conventional 2D sequences for the delineation of intradural nerve rootlets and neural foramina and is less affected by CSF flow artefacts.

[1]  Douglas J Quint,et al.  Comparison of 3.0 T versus 1.5 T MR: imaging of the spine. , 2006, Neuroimaging clinics of North America.

[2]  K. Sartor,et al.  Degenerative spine disorders in the context of clinical findings. , 2006, European journal of radiology.

[3]  J R Hesselink,et al.  MR imaging of the spine: recent advances in pulse sequences and special techniques. , 1994, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[4]  T. Jaspan,et al.  High resolution CISS imaging of the spine. , 2001, The British journal of radiology.

[5]  E. Melhem,et al.  Technical challenges in MR imaging of the cervical spine and cord. , 2000, Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America.

[6]  M. Shapiro,et al.  MR imaging of the spine at 3T. , 2006, Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America.

[7]  G. Barker,et al.  Correction of intensity nonuniformity in MR images of any orientation. , 1993, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[8]  L. Wolansky,et al.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging Protocols for Cervical Disc Disease: What Is Your Neighbor Up To? , 2005, Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging.

[9]  S. Reingold,et al.  The role of magnetic resonance techniques in understanding and managing multiple sclerosis. , 1998, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[10]  A. Viera,et al.  Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. , 2005, Family medicine.

[11]  Christopher F. Beaulieu,et al.  Ankle: isotropic MR imaging with 3D-FSE-cube--initial experience in healthy volunteers. , 2008, Radiology.

[12]  J. Tsuruda,et al.  Effects of magnetic susceptibility artifacts and motion in evaluating the cervical neural foramina on 3DFT gradient-echo MR imaging. , 1991, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[13]  Herwig Imhof,et al.  MR imaging of the cervical spine: assessment of image quality with parallel imaging compared to non-accelerated MR measurements , 2007, European Radiology.

[14]  J. Ross,et al.  Newer sequences for spinal MR imaging: smorgasbord or succotash of acronyms? , 1999, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[15]  Graham Wright,et al.  Musculoskeletal MRI at 3.0 T: relaxation times and image contrast. , 2004, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[16]  Sharmila Majumdar,et al.  Trabecular bone structure of the calcaneus: comparison of MR imaging at 3.0 and 1.5 T with micro-CT as the standard of reference. , 2006, Radiology.

[17]  L. Czervionke,et al.  Imaging of the spine. Techniques of MR imaging. , 1997, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.

[18]  S. Schoenberg,et al.  Measurement of signal‐to‐noise ratios in MR images: Influence of multichannel coils, parallel imaging, and reconstruction filters , 2007, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[19]  Philip J Beatty,et al.  Isotropic MRI of the knee with 3D fast spin-echo extended echo-train acquisition (XETA): initial experience. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[20]  S. Majumdar,et al.  High resolution MRI of small joints: impact of spatial resolution on diagnostic performance and SNR. , 1998, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[21]  Tao Li,et al.  Comparative study of fast MR imaging: quantitative analysis on image quality and efficiency among various time frames and contrast behaviors. , 2002, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[22]  S. Wirth,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the cervical spine: comparison of 2D T2-weighted turbo spin echo, 2D T2*weighted gradient-recalled echo and 3D T2-weighted variable flip-angle turbo spin echo sequences , 2009, European Radiology.

[23]  B. Kimia,et al.  Effects of ACL interference screws on articular cartilage volume and thickness measurements with 1.5 T and 3 T MRI. , 2008, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[24]  F A Fellner,et al.  BLADE in Sagittal T2-Weighted MR Imaging of the Cervical Spine , 2010, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[25]  V M Haughton,et al.  Magnetic susceptibility artifacts in gradient-recalled echo MR imaging. , 1988, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[26]  Thomas M. Link,et al.  MR imaging of the ankle at 3 Tesla and 1.5 Tesla: protocol optimization and application to cartilage, ligament and tendon pathology in cadaver specimens , 2007, European Radiology.

[27]  Val M Runge,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the spine at 3 Tesla. , 2008, Seminars in musculoskeletal radiology.