AJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
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 Yoshikawa, T.
Right arrow Articles by Sugimura, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Yoshikawa, T.
Right arrow Articles by Sugimura, K.
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?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?

ADC Measurement of Abdominal Organs and Lesions Using Parallel Imaging Technique

Takeshi Yoshikawa1, Hideaki Kawamitsu2, Donald G. Mitchell1, Yoshiharu Ohno2, Yonson Ku3, Yasushi Seo4, Masahiko Fujii2 and Kazuro Sugimura2

1 Department of Radiology, Division of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 S 10th St., Suite 1096, Philadelphia, PA 19107.
2 Department of Radiology, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
3 Department of Liver and Transplantation Surgery, Kobe University Hospital, Kobe, Japan.
4 Department of Clinical Molecular Medicine, Division of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.


Figure 1
View larger version (8K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1 —Positions of bottles in phantom study. Position A indicates center, B indicates adjacent to coils, C indicates intermediate position, and D indicates periphery of image.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (31K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2A —Diffusion-weighted images of bottle phantom. Acetone phantom was located at periphery of image (D in Fig. 1) and scanned without parallel imaging (A) and with parallel imaging factors of 1 (B), 2 (C), 3 (D), and 4 (E). Although phantom is clearly visualized on every image, image distortion is severe on images without parallel imaging and with parallel imaging factor of 1. Parallel imaging improved image quality of diffusion-weighted images. Distortion scores were assigned as 1 for images A and B and assigned as 2 for images C, D, and E.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (24K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2B —Diffusion-weighted images of bottle phantom. Acetone phantom was located at periphery of image (D in Fig. 1) and scanned without parallel imaging (A) and with parallel imaging factors of 1 (B), 2 (C), 3 (D), and 4 (E). Although phantom is clearly visualized on every image, image distortion is severe on images without parallel imaging and with parallel imaging factor of 1. Parallel imaging improved image quality of diffusion-weighted images. Distortion scores were assigned as 1 for images A and B and assigned as 2 for images C, D, and E.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (23K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2C —Diffusion-weighted images of bottle phantom. Acetone phantom was located at periphery of image (D in Fig. 1) and scanned without parallel imaging (A) and with parallel imaging factors of 1 (B), 2 (C), 3 (D), and 4 (E). Although phantom is clearly visualized on every image, image distortion is severe on images without parallel imaging and with parallel imaging factor of 1. Parallel imaging improved image quality of diffusion-weighted images. Distortion scores were assigned as 1 for images A and B and assigned as 2 for images C, D, and E.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (21K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2D —Diffusion-weighted images of bottle phantom. Acetone phantom was located at periphery of image (D in Fig. 1) and scanned without parallel imaging (A) and with parallel imaging factors of 1 (B), 2 (C), 3 (D), and 4 (E). Although phantom is clearly visualized on every image, image distortion is severe on images without parallel imaging and with parallel imaging factor of 1. Parallel imaging improved image quality of diffusion-weighted images. Distortion scores were assigned as 1 for images A and B and assigned as 2 for images C, D, and E.

 

Figure 6
View larger version (35K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2E —Diffusion-weighted images of bottle phantom. Acetone phantom was located at periphery of image (D in Fig. 1) and scanned without parallel imaging (A) and with parallel imaging factors of 1 (B), 2 (C), 3 (D), and 4 (E). Although phantom is clearly visualized on every image, image distortion is severe on images without parallel imaging and with parallel imaging factor of 1. Parallel imaging improved image quality of diffusion-weighted images. Distortion scores were assigned as 1 for images A and B and assigned as 2 for images C, D, and E.

 

Figure 7
View larger version (141K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3A —56-year-old man with pathologically proven invasive ductal carcinoma of the pancreas. Tumor of pancreatic tail (arrows, A) shows hyperintensity compared with normal parenchyma on T2-weighted (A) and diffusion-weighted (B) images.

 

Figure 8
View larger version (119K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3B —56-year-old man with pathologically proven invasive ductal carcinoma of the pancreas. Tumor of pancreatic tail (arrows, A) shows hyperintensity compared with normal parenchyma on T2-weighted (A) and diffusion-weighted (B) images.

 

Figure 9
View larger version (134K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3C —56-year-old man with pathologically proven invasive ductal carcinoma of the pancreas. Apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) were calculated (C). Tumor on ADC image shows hyperintensity compared with normal parenchyma. Regions of interest (ROIs) were placed on normal parenchyma (ROI 1, D) and tumor (ROI 2, D). ADCs of normal parenchyma and tumor were 1.66 and 2.05 x 10-3 mm2/s, respectively.

 

Figure 10
View larger version (136K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3D —56-year-old man with pathologically proven invasive ductal carcinoma of the pancreas. Apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) were calculated (C). Tumor on ADC image shows hyperintensity compared with normal parenchyma. Regions of interest (ROIs) were placed on normal parenchyma (ROI 1, D) and tumor (ROI 2, D). ADCs of normal parenchyma and tumor were 1.66 and 2.05 x 10-3 mm2/s, respectively.

 

Figure 11
View larger version (152K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4A —40-year-old woman with pathologically proven angiomyolipoma of kidney. Tumor in lower pole of left kidney (arrows, A) shows hyperintensity compared with normal parenchyma on T2-weighted image (A) and hypointensity on diffusion-weighted image (B).

 

Figure 12
View larger version (117K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4B —40-year-old woman with pathologically proven angiomyolipoma of kidney. Tumor in lower pole of left kidney (arrows, A) shows hyperintensity compared with normal parenchyma on T2-weighted image (A) and hypointensity on diffusion-weighted image (B).

 

Figure 13
View larger version (143K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4C —40-year-old woman with pathologically proven angiomyolipoma of kidney. Apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) were calculated (C). Tumor shows hypointensity compared with normal parenchyma on ADC image. Regions of interest (ROIs) were placed on normal parenchyma (ROI 1, D) and tumor (ROI 2, D). ADCs of normal parenchyma and tumor were 2.85 and 1.33 x 10-3 mm2/s, respectively.

 

Figure 14
View larger version (149K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4D —40-year-old woman with pathologically proven angiomyolipoma of kidney. Apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) were calculated (C). Tumor shows hypointensity compared with normal parenchyma on ADC image. Regions of interest (ROIs) were placed on normal parenchyma (ROI 1, D) and tumor (ROI 2, D). ADCs of normal parenchyma and tumor were 2.85 and 1.33 x 10-3 mm2/s, respectively.

 

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?



HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2006 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.