HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kuhl, C. K. Articles by Schild, H. H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kuhl, C. K. Articles by Schild, H. H.

Sensitivity Encoding for Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging at 3.0 T: Intraindividual Comparative Study¹

¹ From the Department of Radiology, University of Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Strasse 25, D-53105 Bonn, Germany. Received October 7, 2003; revision requested December 30; final revision received March 18, 2004; accepted April 19. Address correspondence to C.K.K. (e-mail: kuhl@uni-bonn.de).

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate whether diffusion-weighted (DW) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with sensitivity encoding (SENSE) at 3.0 T can help to improve image quality and confidence in and accuracy of diagnosis of ischemic lesions, compared with DW MR imaging with conventional phase encoding, in patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients provided informed consent after the study had been explained, and the institutional review board approved the study protocol. Eighty-five patients (46 male and 39 female patients; age range, 13–86 years; mean age, 52 years) underwent single-shot spin-echo echo-planar DW MR imaging at 3.0 T twice, in a randomized order: once with conventional phase encoding (repetition time msec/echo time msec, 4283/79) and once with SENSE (3141/69, with a reduction factor of three). With both, 128 x 128 matrix, 24 4-mm-thick sections, and two b values of 0 and 1000 sec/mm² were used. An eight-element SENSE-compatible receive-only surface coil was used; the built-in body coil served for radiofrequency transmission and generation of the coil sensitivity profile. SENSE and conventional phase encoding were compared for image quality, signal-to-noise ratio, relative signal intensity (SI), and lesion contrast. Two neuroradiologists read images. Diagnostic accuracy of and confidence in detection of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) lesions with conventional phase encoding and SENSE at MR imaging were compared; matched-pairs Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to test statistical significance.

RESULTS: No major SENSE-related artifacts were seen. At MR imaging with SENSE, consistently and significantly (P < .001) higher image quality scores were achieved because of substantial reduction of image distortions and blurring. Lesion contrast was equivalent with both techniques. Diagnostic confidence for demonstration and exclusion of lesions was significantly (P < .001) higher at MR imaging with SENSE. In three patients, small microembolic lesions were only prospectively diagnosed at MR imaging with SENSE, whereas they were masked by adjacent susceptibility effects and therefore overlooked at MR imaging with conventional phase encoding.

CONCLUSION: Parallel MR imaging with SENSE is feasible at 3.0 T. It significantly improves image quality, particularly by reducing or even preventing susceptibility-induced SI changes and image blurring. There was a significantly improved diagnostic confidence with which ADC changes were identified or excluded.

© RSNA, 2005

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Sasaki, K. Yamada, Y. Watanabe, M. Matsui, M. Ida, S. Fujiwara, and E. Shibata Variability in Absolute Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values across Different Platforms May Be Substantial: A Multivendor, Multi-institutional Comparison Study Radiology, November 1, 2008; 249(2): 624 - 630. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. K. Kuhl, F. Traber, and H. H. Schild Whole-Body High-Field-Strength (3.0-T) MR Imaging in Clinical Practice * Part I. Technical Considerations and Clinical Applications Radiology, March 1, 2008; 246(3): 675 - 696. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W.-J. Moon, C. K. Kuhl, J. Gieseke, and H. H. Schild Measurement of Signal-to-Noise Ratio in MR Imaging with Sensitivity Encoding Radiology, June 1, 2007; 243(3): 908 - 909. [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y.A. Bhagat, D.J. Emery, S. Naik, T. Yeo, and C. Beaulieu Comparison of Generalized Autocalibrating Partially Parallel Acquisitions and Modified Sensitivity Encoding for Diffusion Tensor Imaging AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., February 1, 2007; 28(2): 293 - 298. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. Morakkabati-Spitz, H. H. Schild, C. K. Kuhl, G. Lutterbey, M. von Falkenhausen, F. Traber, and J. Gieseke Female Pelvis: MR Imaging at 3.0 T with Sensitivity Encoding and Flip-Angle Sweep Technique Radiology, November 1, 2006; 241(2): 538 - 545. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. K. Kuhl, P. Jost, N. Morakkabati, O. Zivanovic, H. H. Schild, and J. Gieseke Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging of the Breast at 3.0 and 1.5 T in the Same Patients: Initial Experience Radiology, June 1, 2006; 239(3): 666 - 676. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]