Diffusion-tensor fiber tractography: Intraindividual comparison of 3.0-T and 1.5-T MR imaging

被引:68
|
作者
Okada, T
Miki, Y
Fushimi, Y
Hanakawa, T
Kanagaki, M
Yamamoto, A
Urayama, S
Fukuyama, H
Hiraoka, M
Togashi, K
机构
[1] Kyoto Univ, Dept Diagnost Imaging & Nucl Med, Sakyo Ku, Kyoto 6068507, Japan
[2] Kyoto Univ, Dept Therapeut Radiol & Oncol, Sakyo Ku, Kyoto 6068507, Japan
[3] Kyoto Univ, Grad Sch Med, Sakyo Ku, Kyoto 6068507, Japan
[4] Kyoto Univ, Human Brain Res Ctr, Sakyo Ku, Kyoto 6068507, Japan
关键词
D O I
10.1148/radiol.2382042192
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: To prospectively evaluate the depiction of brain fiber tracts at 3.0- versus 1.5-T diffusion-tensor (DT) fiber tractography performed with parallel imaging. Materials and Methods: Institutional review board approval was obtained, and each subject provided written informed consent. Subjects were 30 healthy volunteers (15 men, 15 women; mean age, 28 years; age range, 21-46 years). Single-shot spin-echo echo-planar magnetic resonance (MR) sequences with parallel imaging were applied. Four fiber tracts were reconstructed: corticospinal tract (CST), superior longitudinal fasciculus (SLF), corpus callosum (CC), and fornix. Two neuroradiologists compared 3.0- and 1.5-T tractography in terms of fiber tract depiction by using five depiction scores (scores 0-4) and numbers of reconstructed tract fibers and in terms of lateral asymmetry in the CST by using numbers of reconstructed fibers. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was applied for statistical analysis. Results: Visual scores for both CST hemispheres (P < .001), the right SLIT (P = .005), the CC (P = .01), and the right fornix (P = .04) were higher at 3.0-T DT tractography. Larger numbers of CST (right, P = .008; left, P < .001), SLF (right, P = .001; left, P = .02), and fornix (bilaterally, P = .02) tract fibers were depicted at 3.0 T. The asymmetry index for the CST was lower (P < .001) at 3.0 T. Visual scores for the left SLF and the left fornix and numbers of CC tract fibers were not significantly different. Conclusion: Depiction of most fiber tracts was improved at 3.0-T DT tractography compared with depiction at 1.5-T tractography. (c) RSNA, 2006.
引用
收藏
页码:668 / 678
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Diffusion-tensor MR imaging at 1.5 and 3.0 T: Initial observations
    Hunsche, S
    Moseley, ME
    Stoeter, P
    Hedehus, M
    RADIOLOGY, 2001, 221 (02) : 550 - 556
  • [2] 3.0-T MR Imaging of the Abdomen: Comparison with 1.5 T
    Chang, Kevin J.
    Kamel, Ihab R.
    Macura, Katarzyna J.
    Bluemke, David A.
    RADIOGRAPHICS, 2008, 28 (07) : 1983 - 1998
  • [3] Uterine Cervical Carcinoma: Preoperative Staging with 3.0-T MR Imaging-Comparison with 1.5-T MR Imaging
    Hori, Masatoshi
    Kim, Tonsok
    Murakami, Takamichi
    Imaoka, Izumi
    Onishi, Hiromitsu
    Tomoda, Kaname
    Tsutsui, Tateki
    Enomoto, Takayuki
    Kimura, Tadashi
    Nakamura, Hironobu
    RADIOLOGY, 2009, 251 (01) : 96 - 104
  • [4] Time-of-flight MR angiography: Comparison of 3.0-T imaging and 1.5-T imaging - Initial experience
    Willinek, WA
    Born, M
    Simon, B
    Tschampa, HJ
    Krautmacher, C
    Gieseke, J
    Urbach, H
    Textor, HJ
    Schild, HH
    RADIOLOGY, 2003, 229 (03) : 913 - 920
  • [5] Abdominal applications of 3.0-T MR imaging: Comparative review versus a 1.5-T system
    Choi, Jin-Young
    Kim, Myeong-Jin
    Chung, Yong Eun
    Kim, Ki Youn
    Jones, Alun C.
    de Becker, Jan
    van Cauteren, Marc
    RADIOGRAPHICS, 2008, 28 (04) : e30
  • [6] Evaluation of the acetabular labrum at 3.0-T MR imaging compared with 1.5-t MR arthrography: Preliminary experience
    Sundberg, TP
    Toomayan, GA
    Major, NM
    RADIOLOGY, 2006, 238 (02) : 706 - 711
  • [7] FLAIR diffusion-tensor MR tractography: Comparison of fiber tracking with conventional imaging
    Chou, MC
    Lin, YR
    Huang, TY
    Wang, CY
    Chung, HW
    Juan, CJ
    Chen, CY
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY, 2005, 26 (03) : 591 - 597
  • [8] Fractional anisotropy and mean diffusivity: comparison between 3.0-T and 1.5-T diffusion tensor imaging with parallel imaging using histogram and region of interest analysis
    Fushimi, Yasutaka
    Miki, Yukio
    Okada, Tsutomu
    Yamamoto, Akira
    Mori, Nobuyuki
    Hanakawa, Takashi
    Urayama, Shin-ichi
    Aso, Toshihiko
    Fukuyama, Hidenao
    Kikuta, Ken-ichiro
    Togashi, Kaori
    NMR IN BIOMEDICINE, 2007, 20 (08) : 743 - 748
  • [9] Functional 3.0-T MR assessment of higher cognitive function: Are there advantages over 1.5-T imaging?
    Hoenig, K
    Kuhl, CK
    Scheef, L
    RADIOLOGY, 2005, 234 (03) : 860 - 868
  • [10] Intraindividual comparison of MR-renal perfusion imaging at 1.5 T and 3.0 T
    Michaely, Henrik J.
    Kramer, Harald
    Oesingmann, Niels
    Lodemann, Klaus-Peter
    Miserock, Karl
    Reiser, Maximilian F.
    Schoenberg, Stefan O.
    INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 2007, 42 (06) : 406 - 411