TY - JOUR
T1 - Three-dimensional MR cholangiopancreatography in a breath hold with sparsitybased reconstruction of highly undersampled data
AU - Chandarana, Hersh
AU - Doshi, Ankur M.
AU - Shanbhogue, Alampady
AU - Babb, James S.
AU - Bruno, Mary T.
AU - Zhao, Tiejun
AU - Raithel, Esther
AU - Zenge, Michael O.
AU - Li, Guobin
AU - Otazo, Ricardo
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 RSNA.
PY - 2016/8
Y1 - 2016/8
N2 - Purpose: To develop a three-dimensional breath-hold (BH) magnetic resonance (MR) cholangiopancreatographic protocol with sampling perfection with application-optimized contrast using different flip-angle evolutions (SPACE) acquisition and sparsity-based iterative reconstruction (SPARSE) of prospectively sampled 5% k-space data and to compare the results with conventional respiratory-triggered (RT) acquisition. Materials and Methods: This HIPAA-compliant prospective study was institutional review board approved. Twenty-nine patients underwent conventional RT SPACE and BHCaccelerated SPACE acquisition with 5% k-space sampling at 3 T. Spatial resolution and other parameters were matched when possible. BH SPACE images were reconstructed by enforcing joint multicoil sparsity in the wavelet domain (SPARSE-SPACE). Two board-certified radiologists independently evaluated BH SPARSE-SPACE and RT SPACE images for image quality parameters in the pancreatic duct and common bile duct by using a five-point scale. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare BH SPARSE-SPACE and RT SPACE images. Results: Acquisition time for BH SPARSE-SPACE was 20 seconds, which was significantly (P <.001) shorter than that for RT SPACE (mean 6 standard deviation, 338.8 sec 6 69.1). Overall image quality scores were higher for BH SPARSE-SPACE than for RT SPACE images for both readers for the proximal, middle, and distal pancreatic duct, but the difference was not statistically significant (P ≥.05). For reader 1, distal common bile duct scores were significantly higher with BH SPARSE-SPACE acquisition (P =.036). More patients had acceptable or better overall image quality (scores ≥ 3) with BH SPARSE-SPACE than with RT SPACE acquisition, respectively, for the proximal (23 of 29 [79%] vs 22 of 29 [76%]), middle (22 of 29 [76%] vs 18 of 29 [62%]), and distal (20 of 29 [69%] vs 13 of 29 [45%]) pancreatic duct and the proximal (25 of 28 [89%] vs 22 of 28 [79%]) and distal (25 of 28 [89%] vs 24 of 28 [86%]) common bile duct. Conclusion: BH SPARSE-SPACE showed similar or superior image quality for the pancreatic and common duct compared with that of RT SPACE despite 17-fold shorter acquisition time.
AB - Purpose: To develop a three-dimensional breath-hold (BH) magnetic resonance (MR) cholangiopancreatographic protocol with sampling perfection with application-optimized contrast using different flip-angle evolutions (SPACE) acquisition and sparsity-based iterative reconstruction (SPARSE) of prospectively sampled 5% k-space data and to compare the results with conventional respiratory-triggered (RT) acquisition. Materials and Methods: This HIPAA-compliant prospective study was institutional review board approved. Twenty-nine patients underwent conventional RT SPACE and BHCaccelerated SPACE acquisition with 5% k-space sampling at 3 T. Spatial resolution and other parameters were matched when possible. BH SPACE images were reconstructed by enforcing joint multicoil sparsity in the wavelet domain (SPARSE-SPACE). Two board-certified radiologists independently evaluated BH SPARSE-SPACE and RT SPACE images for image quality parameters in the pancreatic duct and common bile duct by using a five-point scale. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare BH SPARSE-SPACE and RT SPACE images. Results: Acquisition time for BH SPARSE-SPACE was 20 seconds, which was significantly (P <.001) shorter than that for RT SPACE (mean 6 standard deviation, 338.8 sec 6 69.1). Overall image quality scores were higher for BH SPARSE-SPACE than for RT SPACE images for both readers for the proximal, middle, and distal pancreatic duct, but the difference was not statistically significant (P ≥.05). For reader 1, distal common bile duct scores were significantly higher with BH SPARSE-SPACE acquisition (P =.036). More patients had acceptable or better overall image quality (scores ≥ 3) with BH SPARSE-SPACE than with RT SPACE acquisition, respectively, for the proximal (23 of 29 [79%] vs 22 of 29 [76%]), middle (22 of 29 [76%] vs 18 of 29 [62%]), and distal (20 of 29 [69%] vs 13 of 29 [45%]) pancreatic duct and the proximal (25 of 28 [89%] vs 22 of 28 [79%]) and distal (25 of 28 [89%] vs 24 of 28 [86%]) common bile duct. Conclusion: BH SPARSE-SPACE showed similar or superior image quality for the pancreatic and common duct compared with that of RT SPACE despite 17-fold shorter acquisition time.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84979937134&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1148/radiol.2016151935
DO - 10.1148/radiol.2016151935
M3 - Article
C2 - 26982678
AN - SCOPUS:84979937134
SN - 0033-8419
VL - 280
SP - 585
EP - 594
JO - Radiology
JF - Radiology
IS - 2
ER -