Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2008
Imaging endolymphatic hydrops at 3 tesla using 3D-FLAIR with intratympanic Gd-DTPA administration.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Naganawa Shinji, Satake Hiroko, Iwano Shingo, Fukatsu Hiroshi, Sone Michihiko, Nakashima Tsutomu
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Visualization of endolymphatic hydrops by 3-dimensional fluid-attenuated inversion recovery-FLAIR using conventional turbo-spin-echo (3D-FLAIR-CONV) after intratympanic injection of Gd-DTPA has been reported in patients with Ménière's disease. Compared to 3D-FLAIR-CONV used in previous studies, the addition of a variable flip-angle technique (3D-FLAIR-VFL) enables very long echo trains and, therefore, shorter scan times. We evaluated whether 3D-FLAIR-VFL could replace 3D-FLAIR-CONV in detecting endolymphatic hydrops after intratympanic Gd-DTPA administration.
METHODS: Eleven patients were included in this study. Twenty-four hours after Gd-DTPA injection, we performed 3D-FLAIR-CONV and 3D-FLAIR-VFL imaging at 3T. We compared the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) between cochlear fluid and the cerebellum between the 2 FLAIR sequences. We subjectively scored the size of the endolymphatic space in the cochlea and vestibule for each patient and correlated the scores with the clinical diagnoses.
RESULTS: The CNR of 3D-FLAIR-CONV was significantly higher than that of 3D-FLAIR-VFL. Scores for the size of endolymphatic space in the vestibule were identical between the 2 sequences; however, those in the cochlea disagreed in 3 cases. 3D-FLAIR-CONV correlated better with the clinical diagnoses.
CONCLUSIONS: Currently, we may not be able to replace 3D-FLAIR-CONV with 3D-FLAIR-VFL, at least not with the scanning parameters used in the present study.
METHODS: Eleven patients were included in this study. Twenty-four hours after Gd-DTPA injection, we performed 3D-FLAIR-CONV and 3D-FLAIR-VFL imaging at 3T. We compared the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) between cochlear fluid and the cerebellum between the 2 FLAIR sequences. We subjectively scored the size of the endolymphatic space in the cochlea and vestibule for each patient and correlated the scores with the clinical diagnoses.
RESULTS: The CNR of 3D-FLAIR-CONV was significantly higher than that of 3D-FLAIR-VFL. Scores for the size of endolymphatic space in the vestibule were identical between the 2 sequences; however, those in the cochlea disagreed in 3 cases. 3D-FLAIR-CONV correlated better with the clinical diagnoses.
CONCLUSIONS: Currently, we may not be able to replace 3D-FLAIR-CONV with 3D-FLAIR-VFL, at least not with the scanning parameters used in the present study.