Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2017
Quantification of the salivary volume flow rate in the parotid duct using the time-spatial labeling inversion pulse (Time-SLIP) technique at MRI: A feasibility study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fukumoto Wataru, Higaki Toru, Matsuoka Yoshiko, Tatsugami Fuminari, Baba Yasutaka, Iida Makoto, Awai Kazuo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: We developed a method to quantify the volume flow rate (VFR) using the time-spatial labeling inversion pulse (Time-SLIP) technique to evaluate salivary function.
PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: To investigate the accuracy of quantification of the salivary VFR using the Time-SLIP technique in phantoms and to examine the feasibility of its use in human subjects.
STUDY TYPE: This was a prospective phantom and volunteer study.
POPULATION/SUBJECTS/PHANTOM/SPECIMEN/ANIMAL MODEL: A phantom and 23 normal volunteers who fasted at least 2 hours study was performed.
FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: Flow images of the phantom and the parotid duct of 23 volunteers were acquired on a 3T-MRI scanner using the Time-SLIP technique.
ASSESSMENT: Hypothesizing that flow aggregates in the conducting duct, we measured the VFR on flow images. In the phantom study, the actual VFR (slow, medium, fast flow) was controlled by an automatic pump system and the measured VFR was compared with the actual VFR on flow images. In the human study we injected citric acid into the mouth of healthy volunteers to stimulate saliva secretion and recorded the VFR.
STATISTICAL TESTS: As this study was a feasibility study, statistical tests were not performed.
RESULTS: In the phantom study, the VFR at slow, medium, and fast flow was 5.7 ± 0.4 (SD), 8.4 ± 0.3, and 12.2 ± 1.1 mm3 /sec, respectively. The error between the measured and actual VFR values was 2.8-3.7%. Salivary flow in the parotid duct was visualized in 22 of the 23 volunteers. The mean VFR was 8760 mm3 /10 min.
DATA CONCLUSION: When salivary flow was stimulated with citric acid in normal volunteers, the salivary VFR could be obtained using the Time-SLIP technique.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:928-935.
PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: To investigate the accuracy of quantification of the salivary VFR using the Time-SLIP technique in phantoms and to examine the feasibility of its use in human subjects.
STUDY TYPE: This was a prospective phantom and volunteer study.
POPULATION/SUBJECTS/PHANTOM/SPECIMEN/ANIMAL MODEL: A phantom and 23 normal volunteers who fasted at least 2 hours study was performed.
FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: Flow images of the phantom and the parotid duct of 23 volunteers were acquired on a 3T-MRI scanner using the Time-SLIP technique.
ASSESSMENT: Hypothesizing that flow aggregates in the conducting duct, we measured the VFR on flow images. In the phantom study, the actual VFR (slow, medium, fast flow) was controlled by an automatic pump system and the measured VFR was compared with the actual VFR on flow images. In the human study we injected citric acid into the mouth of healthy volunteers to stimulate saliva secretion and recorded the VFR.
STATISTICAL TESTS: As this study was a feasibility study, statistical tests were not performed.
RESULTS: In the phantom study, the VFR at slow, medium, and fast flow was 5.7 ± 0.4 (SD), 8.4 ± 0.3, and 12.2 ± 1.1 mm3 /sec, respectively. The error between the measured and actual VFR values was 2.8-3.7%. Salivary flow in the parotid duct was visualized in 22 of the 23 volunteers. The mean VFR was 8760 mm3 /10 min.
DATA CONCLUSION: When salivary flow was stimulated with citric acid in normal volunteers, the salivary VFR could be obtained using the Time-SLIP technique.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 2 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:928-935.