Detection of hepatic metastases with MR imaging: Spin-echo vs phase-contrast pulse sequences at 0.6 T

E. Rummeny, S. Saini, D. D. Stark, R. Weissleder, Carolyn Compton, J. T. Ferrucci

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the sensitivity of T1-weighted and T2-weighted spin-echo (SE) pulse sequences with T2-weighted phase-contrast (PC) imaging techniques for the detection of hepatic metastases. Pulse-sequence performance was evaluated in 52 consecutive patients with 88 hepatic metastases who underwent MR imaging at 0.6 T. Lesion-liver contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) on SE 260/14 (-12.4 ± 6.7) and PC 2350/60 (+10.8 ± 4.2) images were significantly (p < .05) greater than on SE 2350/60 (+7.8 ± 3.9), SE 2350/120 (+8.1 ± 4.8), SE 2350/180 (+7.9 ± 4.5), and PC 2350/30 (+4.6 ± 2.9) images. Sensitivity for detection of 88 individual metastases was comparable on SE 260/14 (78 of 88 patients) and PC 2350/60 (81 of 88 patients) images and was significantly (p < .05) greater than on in-phase T2-weighted SE images (TE = 60, 70 of 88 patients; TE = 120, 69 of 88 patients; TE = 180, 65 of 88 patients). Histologic analysis of tumor-free liver showed fatty change in 11 of 13 specimens available for pathologic evaluation. In all 11 of those patients, PC images increased tumor-liver contrast in comparison with the in-phase SE images. This analysis suggests that for detection of hepatic metastases at midfield strengths, the T1-weighted, short TR/short TE (SE 260/14) and the T2-weighted, phase-contrast (PC 2350/60) pulse sequences offer comparable performance.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1207-1211
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Roentgenology
Volume153
Issue number6
StatePublished - 1989
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Neoplasm Metastasis
Liver
Fatty Liver
Noise
Neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Rummeny, E., Saini, S., Stark, D. D., Weissleder, R., Compton, C., & Ferrucci, J. T. (1989). Detection of hepatic metastases with MR imaging: Spin-echo vs phase-contrast pulse sequences at 0.6 T. American Journal of Roentgenology, 153(6), 1207-1211.

Detection of hepatic metastases with MR imaging : Spin-echo vs phase-contrast pulse sequences at 0.6 T. / Rummeny, E.; Saini, S.; Stark, D. D.; Weissleder, R.; Compton, Carolyn; Ferrucci, J. T.

In: American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol. 153, No. 6, 1989, p. 1207-1211.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rummeny, E, Saini, S, Stark, DD, Weissleder, R, Compton, C & Ferrucci, JT 1989, 'Detection of hepatic metastases with MR imaging: Spin-echo vs phase-contrast pulse sequences at 0.6 T', American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 153, no. 6, pp. 1207-1211.
Rummeny, E. ; Saini, S. ; Stark, D. D. ; Weissleder, R. ; Compton, Carolyn ; Ferrucci, J. T. / Detection of hepatic metastases with MR imaging : Spin-echo vs phase-contrast pulse sequences at 0.6 T. In: American Journal of Roentgenology. 1989 ; Vol. 153, No. 6. pp. 1207-1211.
@article{f6a23b0eb5184998900884b18ccc39ae,
title = "Detection of hepatic metastases with MR imaging: Spin-echo vs phase-contrast pulse sequences at 0.6 T",
abstract = "The purpose of this study was to compare the sensitivity of T1-weighted and T2-weighted spin-echo (SE) pulse sequences with T2-weighted phase-contrast (PC) imaging techniques for the detection of hepatic metastases. Pulse-sequence performance was evaluated in 52 consecutive patients with 88 hepatic metastases who underwent MR imaging at 0.6 T. Lesion-liver contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) on SE 260/14 (-12.4 ± 6.7) and PC 2350/60 (+10.8 ± 4.2) images were significantly (p < .05) greater than on SE 2350/60 (+7.8 ± 3.9), SE 2350/120 (+8.1 ± 4.8), SE 2350/180 (+7.9 ± 4.5), and PC 2350/30 (+4.6 ± 2.9) images. Sensitivity for detection of 88 individual metastases was comparable on SE 260/14 (78 of 88 patients) and PC 2350/60 (81 of 88 patients) images and was significantly (p < .05) greater than on in-phase T2-weighted SE images (TE = 60, 70 of 88 patients; TE = 120, 69 of 88 patients; TE = 180, 65 of 88 patients). Histologic analysis of tumor-free liver showed fatty change in 11 of 13 specimens available for pathologic evaluation. In all 11 of those patients, PC images increased tumor-liver contrast in comparison with the in-phase SE images. This analysis suggests that for detection of hepatic metastases at midfield strengths, the T1-weighted, short TR/short TE (SE 260/14) and the T2-weighted, phase-contrast (PC 2350/60) pulse sequences offer comparable performance.",
author = "E. Rummeny and S. Saini and Stark, {D. D.} and R. Weissleder and Carolyn Compton and Ferrucci, {J. T.}",
year = "1989",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "153",
pages = "1207--1211",
journal = "American Journal of Roentgenology",
issn = "0361-803X",
publisher = "American Roentgen Ray Society",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Detection of hepatic metastases with MR imaging

T2 - Spin-echo vs phase-contrast pulse sequences at 0.6 T

AU - Rummeny, E.

AU - Saini, S.

AU - Stark, D. D.

AU - Weissleder, R.

AU - Compton, Carolyn

AU - Ferrucci, J. T.

PY - 1989

Y1 - 1989

N2 - The purpose of this study was to compare the sensitivity of T1-weighted and T2-weighted spin-echo (SE) pulse sequences with T2-weighted phase-contrast (PC) imaging techniques for the detection of hepatic metastases. Pulse-sequence performance was evaluated in 52 consecutive patients with 88 hepatic metastases who underwent MR imaging at 0.6 T. Lesion-liver contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) on SE 260/14 (-12.4 ± 6.7) and PC 2350/60 (+10.8 ± 4.2) images were significantly (p < .05) greater than on SE 2350/60 (+7.8 ± 3.9), SE 2350/120 (+8.1 ± 4.8), SE 2350/180 (+7.9 ± 4.5), and PC 2350/30 (+4.6 ± 2.9) images. Sensitivity for detection of 88 individual metastases was comparable on SE 260/14 (78 of 88 patients) and PC 2350/60 (81 of 88 patients) images and was significantly (p < .05) greater than on in-phase T2-weighted SE images (TE = 60, 70 of 88 patients; TE = 120, 69 of 88 patients; TE = 180, 65 of 88 patients). Histologic analysis of tumor-free liver showed fatty change in 11 of 13 specimens available for pathologic evaluation. In all 11 of those patients, PC images increased tumor-liver contrast in comparison with the in-phase SE images. This analysis suggests that for detection of hepatic metastases at midfield strengths, the T1-weighted, short TR/short TE (SE 260/14) and the T2-weighted, phase-contrast (PC 2350/60) pulse sequences offer comparable performance.

AB - The purpose of this study was to compare the sensitivity of T1-weighted and T2-weighted spin-echo (SE) pulse sequences with T2-weighted phase-contrast (PC) imaging techniques for the detection of hepatic metastases. Pulse-sequence performance was evaluated in 52 consecutive patients with 88 hepatic metastases who underwent MR imaging at 0.6 T. Lesion-liver contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR) on SE 260/14 (-12.4 ± 6.7) and PC 2350/60 (+10.8 ± 4.2) images were significantly (p < .05) greater than on SE 2350/60 (+7.8 ± 3.9), SE 2350/120 (+8.1 ± 4.8), SE 2350/180 (+7.9 ± 4.5), and PC 2350/30 (+4.6 ± 2.9) images. Sensitivity for detection of 88 individual metastases was comparable on SE 260/14 (78 of 88 patients) and PC 2350/60 (81 of 88 patients) images and was significantly (p < .05) greater than on in-phase T2-weighted SE images (TE = 60, 70 of 88 patients; TE = 120, 69 of 88 patients; TE = 180, 65 of 88 patients). Histologic analysis of tumor-free liver showed fatty change in 11 of 13 specimens available for pathologic evaluation. In all 11 of those patients, PC images increased tumor-liver contrast in comparison with the in-phase SE images. This analysis suggests that for detection of hepatic metastases at midfield strengths, the T1-weighted, short TR/short TE (SE 260/14) and the T2-weighted, phase-contrast (PC 2350/60) pulse sequences offer comparable performance.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0024358051&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0024358051&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 2683677

AN - SCOPUS:0024358051

VL - 153

SP - 1207

EP - 1211

JO - American Journal of Roentgenology

JF - American Journal of Roentgenology

SN - 0361-803X

IS - 6

ER -