Characterization of focal liver lesions with half‐Fourier acquisition single‐shot turbo‐spin‐echo (HASTE) and inversion recovery (IR)‐HASTE sequences

The half‐Fourier acquisition single‐shot turbo‐spinecho (HASTE) sequence allows for heavily T2‐weighted images, and the inversion recovery (IR)‐HASTE sequence represents the T1 value of the tissue in a very short time. This study was undertaken to determine whether characterizing focal liver lesions can be made by combination with these very fast sequences. Seventy‐four patients (33 cysts, 28 hemangiomas, and 33 malignant solid liver masses [15 metastatic tumors, 14 hepatocellular carcinomas, and 4 cholangiocarcinomasl]) underwent dynamic CT and breath‐hold abdominal MRI using turbo‐spin‐echo (TSE), HASTE, and IR‐HASTE sequences with variable TI values on a 1.5‐T MR unit. The imaging time for each slice was 2 seconds for HASTE imaging and 2 to 4 seconds for IR‐HASTE imaging. Lesion detection and qualitative characterization were evaluated. Quantitative analysis was performed by measuring the contrast‐to‐noise ratios (CNRs) as well as visual analysis. The inversion time (TI) nulling values were also statistically analyzed. All cystic lesions were detected on both TSE and HASTE imagings. For solid lesions, TSE failed to detect one small solid lesion and HASTE sequence failed to detect three lesions. With HASTE sequences, all cysts and hemangiomas were markedly hyperintense in comparison with malignant solid masses. CNRs of hemangiomas or cysts were significantly higher than those of malignant solid masses (P < .01), and there was no overlap. The TI nulling value was 1,100 ± 100 msec for hemangiomas, 1,900 ± 110 msec for cysts, and 740 ± 140 msec for malignant solid masses. There was no overlap between the TI nulling values of hemangiomas and cysts (P < .01). By combining the CNR from the HASTE sequence and the TI nulling value from the IR‐HASTE sequence, complete discrimination among malignant solid masses, hemangiomas, and cysts of the liver could be made. Application of HASTE (representing T2 values) and IR‐HASTE (representing T1 values) sequences provided a rapid and reliable imaging method for characterizing focal liver lesions without the use of contrast medium.

[1]  K. Ohtomo,et al.  Noninvasive diagnosis of small cavernous hemangioma of the liver: advantage of MRI. , 1985, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[2]  A. Crawley,et al.  Errors in T2 estimation using multislice multiple‐echo imaging , 1987, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[3]  G. Bydder,et al.  Nuclear magnetic resonance imaging of the liver: initial experience. , 1982, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[4]  C. Hardy,et al.  A review of 1H nuclear magnetic resonance relaxation in pathology: are T1 and T2 diagnostic? , 1987, Medical physics.

[5]  A M Aisen,et al.  Hepatic cavernous hemangioma: magnetic resonance imaging. Work in progress. , 1985, Radiology.

[6]  M Takahashi,et al.  The value of MR urography that uses HASTE sequences to reveal urinary tract disorders. , 1996, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[7]  H Engels,et al.  Incidental magnetization transfer contrast in standard multislice imaging. , 1990, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[8]  M Takahashi,et al.  Liver T2-weighted MR imaging: comparison of fast and conventional half-Fourier single-shot turbo spin-echo, breath-hold turbo spin-echo, and respiratory-triggered turbo spin-echo sequences. , 1997, Radiology.

[9]  R. Edelman,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging of cavernous hemangioma of the liver: tissue-specific characterization. , 1985, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[10]  G M Bydder,et al.  MR Imaging: Clinical Use of the Inversion Recovery Sequence , 1985, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[11]  R. Passariello,et al.  MR characterization of hepatic lesions by t-null inversion recovery sequence. , 1990, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[12]  M Brant-Zawadzki,et al.  MR technology: effect of even-echo rephasing on calculated T2 values and T2 images. , 1985, Radiology.

[13]  M Takahashi,et al.  MR cholangiopancreatography using HASTE (half-Fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin-echo) sequences. , 1996, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[14]  H. Hricak,et al.  Relative Intensity of Abdominal Organs in MR Images , 1985, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[15]  F. Bookstein,et al.  Distinction of hepatic cavernous hemangioma from hepatic metastases with MR imaging. , 1988, Radiology.

[16]  J. Heiken,et al.  Potential MR pitfall in relying on lesion/liver intensity ratio in presence of hepatic hemochromatosis. , 1988, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[17]  R. Günther,et al.  Incremental flip angle snapshot FLASH MRI of hepatic lesions: improvement of signal-to-noise and contrast. , 1992, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[18]  R. Semelka,et al.  Hypervascular malignant liver lesions: comparison of various MR imaging pulse sequences and dynamic CT. , 1994, Radiology.

[19]  R. Weissleder,et al.  Differentiation of hepatic metastases from hepatic hemangiomas and cysts by using MR imaging. , 1988, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[20]  R. Semelka,et al.  Islet cell tumors: comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced CT and MR imaging with dynamic gadolinium enhancement and fat suppression. , 1993, Radiology.

[21]  J. Lee,et al.  Focal hepatic lesions: differentiation with MR imaging at 0.5 T. , 1991, Radiology.

[22]  J C Gore,et al.  Errors in the measurements of T2 using multiple‐echo MRI techniques. I. Effects of radiofrequency pulse imperfections , 1986, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[23]  R. Edelman,et al.  Differentiation between hemangiomas and cysts of the liver with nonenhanced MR imaging: Efficacy of T2 values at 1.5 T , 1993, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[24]  M. Cohen,et al.  Value of T1 and T2 relaxation times from echoplanar MR imaging in the characterization of focal hepatic lesions. , 1993, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.