AJR Women's Imaging Online
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Catasca, J. V.
Right arrow Articles by Mirowitz, S. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Catasca, J. V.
Right arrow Articles by Mirowitz, S. A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 162, 61-67, Copyright © 1994 by American Roentgen Ray Society


ARTICLES

T2-weighted MR imaging of the abdomen: fast spin-echo vs conventional spin-echo sequences

JV Catasca and SA Mirowitz
Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO 63110.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare one optimized T2- weighted fast spin-echo sequence with one T2-weighted conventional spin- echo sequence to determine the impact of fast spin echo on image quality and diagnostic efficacy for evaluation of the abdomen. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. A total of 32 patients with 43 lesions involving various abdominal organs were examined. T2-weighted fast spin-echo (4000/119/4, echo train length = 16, matrix = 256 x 256) and T2-weighted conventional spin-echo (3400-3800/80/2, matrix = 128 x 256) images were compared qualitatively and quantitatively to determine whether the two types of images differed with respect to tissue contrast, conspicuousness of lesions, image quality, and artifacts. RESULTS. The signal intensity of all abdominal structures (except gallbladder and fat) was significantly lower on fast spin-echo images than on conventional spin-echo images. Qualitative liver-to-spleen contrast was significantly reduced on fast spin-echo images, whereas quantitative liver-to-spleen contrast was not significantly different. Blurring of anatomic structures, vascular pulsation, and chemical-shift misregistration artifacts were significantly reduced on fast spin-echo images. The qualitative conspicuousness and contrast-to-noise ratio for all lesions evaluated together were not significantly different (p = .5 and p = .069, respectively) on fast spin-echo vs conventional spin-echo images. However, qualitative conspicuousness and contrast-to-noise ratio of solid lesions were significantly reduced on fast spin-echo images (p = .022 and p = .01, respectively). The contrast-to-noise ratio of cystic lesions was significantly better (p = .002) on fast spin-echo images than on conventional spin-echo images. CONCLUSION. Although the fast spin-echo protocol used in this study provides better image quality and contrast-to-noise ratio for cystic abdominal lesions than does conventional spin echo, the qualitative conspicuousness and contrast-to-noise ratio of solid abdominal lesions are decreased. Fast spin echo provides high-quality images with fewer artifacts in significantly less time than is possible with conventional spin-echo images. Further evaluation is necessary to determine the optimal protocol for T2-weighted fast spin-echo MR imaging of the abdomen.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. Huang, S. S. Raman, N. Vuong, J. W. Sayre, and D. S. K. Lu
Utility of Breath-Hold Fast-Recovery Fast Spin-Echo T2 Versus Respiratory-Triggered Fast Spin-Echo T2 in Clinical Hepatic Imaging
Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2005; 184(3): 842 - 846.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
C Walter, M Kruessell, A Gindele, H G Brochhagen, A Gossmann, and P Landwehr
Imaging of renal lesions: evaluation of fast MRI and helical CT
Br. J. Radiol., October 1, 2003; 76(910): 696 - 703.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
A. Laghi, I. Carbone, C. Catalano, R. Iannaccone, P. Paolantonio, I. Baeli, S. Trenna, and R. Passariello
Polyethylene Glycol Solution as an Oral Contrast Agent for MR Imaging of the Small Bowel
Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2001; 177(6): 1333 - 1334.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
Y. Y. Jeong, D. G. Mitchell, and G. A. Holland
Liver Lesion Conspicuity: T2-weighted Breath-hold Fast Spin-Echo MR Imaging before and after Gadolinium Enhancement—Initial Experience
Radiology, May 1, 2001; 219(2): 455 - 460.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
R. Tello, H. M. Fenlon, T. Gagliano, V. L. S. deCarvalho, and E. K. Yucel
Prediction Rule for Characterization of Hepatic Lesions Revealed on MR Imaging: Estimation of Malignancy
Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2001; 176(4): 879 - 884.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
G. L. Bennett, A. Petersein, W. W. Mayo-Smith, P. F. Hahn, W. Schima, and S. Saini
Addition of Gadolinium Chelates to Heavily T2-Weighted MR Imaging: Limited Role in Differentiating Hepatic Hemangiomas from Metastases
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2000; 174(2): 477 - 485.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
R. C. Semelka, N. C. Balci, B. O. de Beeck, and C. Reinhold
Evaluation of a 10-minute Comprehensive MR Imaging Examination of the Upper Abdomen
Radiology, April 1, 1999; 211(1): 189 - 195.
[Abstract] [Full Text]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1994 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.