Comparison of Diffusion-Weighted MRI Using Single-Shot Echo-Planar Imaging and Split Acquisition of Fast Spin-Echo Signal Imaging, a Non-EPI Technique, in Tumors of the Head and Neck.

Hedda J van der Hulst, Loes Braun, Bram Westerink, Georgios Agrotis, Leon C Ter Beek, Renaud Tissier, Milad Ahmadian, Roland M Martens, Jan W Casselman, Regina G H Beets-Tan, Michiel W M van den Brekel, Jonas A Castelijns
{"title":"Comparison of Diffusion-Weighted MRI Using Single-Shot Echo-Planar Imaging and Split Acquisition of Fast Spin-Echo Signal Imaging, a Non-EPI Technique, in Tumors of the Head and Neck.","authors":"Hedda J van der Hulst, Loes Braun, Bram Westerink, Georgios Agrotis, Leon C Ter Beek, Renaud Tissier, Milad Ahmadian, Roland M Martens, Jan W Casselman, Regina G H Beets-Tan, Michiel W M van den Brekel, Jonas A Castelijns","doi":"10.3174/ajnr.A8529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>DWI using single-shot echo-planar imaging (DWI-EPI) is susceptible to distortions around air-filled cavities and dental fillings, typical for the head and neck area. Non-EPI, split acquisition of fast spin-echo signals for diffusion imaging (DW-SPLICE) could reduce these distortions and enhance image quality, thereby potentially improving recurrence assessment in squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the head and neck region. This study evaluated whether DW-SPLICE is a viable alternative to DWI-EPI through quantitative and qualitative analyses.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The DW-SPLICE sequence was incorporated into the standard 3T head and neck MRI protocol with DWI-EPI. Retrospective analysis was conducted on 2 subgroups: first benign or malignant lesions, and second, posttreatment SCC recurrence. In both subgroups, image quality and distortion were scored by 2 independent radiologists, blinded to the DWI technique and evaluated using mixed-effect linear models. Lesion ADC values were assessed with interclass correlation and Bland-Altman analyses. The delineation geometric similarity of DWI to T1-weighted postcontrast MRI was evaluated using the DSC before and after registration. Recurrence in posttreatment SCC scans was evaluated by the same 2 radiologists blinded to the DWI technique. Recurrence detection rates were then compared between DW-SPLICE and DWI-EPI using mixed logistic regression at 6 months and 1 year postscan follow-up data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From August 2020 to January 2022, fifty-five benign or malignant lesion scans (55 patients) and 74 posttreatment SCC scans (66 patients) were analyzed. DW-SPLICE scored better on image quality and showed less overall distortion than DWI-EPI (0.04<<i>P</i> < .001). There was high ADC measurement reliability (intraclsss correlation coefficient = 0.93, <i>P</i> < .001), though a proportional bias was also observed (β = 0.11, <i>P</i> = .03), indicating that the bias increases as ADC values increase. DW-SPLICE exhibited greater geometric similarity to T1WI with gadolinium contrast before registration (DSC 0.63 versus 0.47, <i>P</i> < .001) and outperformed DWI-EPI by more accurately identifying recurrences after 1 year (OR  = 0.96, <i>P</i> = .05) but not after 6 months (OR  = 0.72, <i>P</i> = .13).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>DW-SPLICE surpasses DWI-EPI on image distortion and quality and improves diagnostic reliability for detecting recurrent or residual SCC on 3T MRI of the head and neck. Consistent use of 1 method for follow-up is advised, because ADC values are not completely interchangeable. Integrating DW-SPLICE can significantly improve tumor assessments in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":93863,"journal":{"name":"AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology","volume":" ","pages":"774-783"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A8529","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and purpose: DWI using single-shot echo-planar imaging (DWI-EPI) is susceptible to distortions around air-filled cavities and dental fillings, typical for the head and neck area. Non-EPI, split acquisition of fast spin-echo signals for diffusion imaging (DW-SPLICE) could reduce these distortions and enhance image quality, thereby potentially improving recurrence assessment in squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the head and neck region. This study evaluated whether DW-SPLICE is a viable alternative to DWI-EPI through quantitative and qualitative analyses.

Materials and methods: The DW-SPLICE sequence was incorporated into the standard 3T head and neck MRI protocol with DWI-EPI. Retrospective analysis was conducted on 2 subgroups: first benign or malignant lesions, and second, posttreatment SCC recurrence. In both subgroups, image quality and distortion were scored by 2 independent radiologists, blinded to the DWI technique and evaluated using mixed-effect linear models. Lesion ADC values were assessed with interclass correlation and Bland-Altman analyses. The delineation geometric similarity of DWI to T1-weighted postcontrast MRI was evaluated using the DSC before and after registration. Recurrence in posttreatment SCC scans was evaluated by the same 2 radiologists blinded to the DWI technique. Recurrence detection rates were then compared between DW-SPLICE and DWI-EPI using mixed logistic regression at 6 months and 1 year postscan follow-up data.

Results: From August 2020 to January 2022, fifty-five benign or malignant lesion scans (55 patients) and 74 posttreatment SCC scans (66 patients) were analyzed. DW-SPLICE scored better on image quality and showed less overall distortion than DWI-EPI (0.04<P < .001). There was high ADC measurement reliability (intraclsss correlation coefficient = 0.93, P < .001), though a proportional bias was also observed (β = 0.11, P = .03), indicating that the bias increases as ADC values increase. DW-SPLICE exhibited greater geometric similarity to T1WI with gadolinium contrast before registration (DSC 0.63 versus 0.47, P < .001) and outperformed DWI-EPI by more accurately identifying recurrences after 1 year (OR  = 0.96, P = .05) but not after 6 months (OR  = 0.72, P = .13).

Conclusions: DW-SPLICE surpasses DWI-EPI on image distortion and quality and improves diagnostic reliability for detecting recurrent or residual SCC on 3T MRI of the head and neck. Consistent use of 1 method for follow-up is advised, because ADC values are not completely interchangeable. Integrating DW-SPLICE can significantly improve tumor assessments in clinical practice.

头颈部肿瘤弥散加权磁共振成像(Diffusion-weighted MRI)与单射回声平面成像(SS-EPI)和快速自旋回波信号分割采集成像(SPLICE)(一种非 EPI 技术)的比较。
背景和目的:使用单次回波平面成像(DW-EPI)的弥散加权成像(DWI)容易在充满空气的空腔和牙科填充物周围出现失真,而这在头颈部地区非常典型。非EPI、快速自旋回波信号扩散成像(DWSPLICE)的分割采集可减少这些失真并提高图像质量,从而有可能改善头颈部鳞状细胞癌(SCC)的复发评估。本研究通过定量和定性分析评估了 DW-SPLICE 是否是 DW-EPI 的可行替代方案:将 DW-SPLICE 序列纳入标准 3.0T 头颈部 MRI DW-EPI 方案中。对两个亚组进行了回顾性分析:首先是良性或恶性病变,其次是治疗后 SCC 复发。在这两个亚组中,图像质量和失真均由两名独立的放射科医生进行评分,他们对 DW 技术都是盲人,并使用混合效应线性模型进行评估。病变表观弥散系数(ADC)值通过类间相关性(ICC)和布兰-阿尔特曼分析进行评估。使用戴斯相似性系数(DSC)评估登记前后 DWI 与 T1 加权后对比(T1Wc)MRI 的几何相似性。治疗后 SCC 扫描中的复发情况由同样的两名放射科医生进行评估,他们对 DW 技术进行了盲测。然后使用混合逻辑回归法比较DW-SPLICE和DW-EPI在六个月和一年扫描后随访数据中的复发检测率:结果:从 2020 年 8 月到 2022 年 1 月,共分析了 55 例良性或恶性病变扫描(55 例患者)和 74 例治疗后 SCC 扫描(66 例患者)。与 DW-EPI 相比,DW-SPLICE 的图像质量得分更高,总体失真更少(0.04):DW-SPLICE在图像失真和质量方面均优于DW-EPI,提高了在HN的3T MRI上检测复发或残留SCC的诊断可靠性。由于 ADC 值不能完全互换,建议在随访时始终使用一种方法。整合 DW-SPLICE 可以显著改善临床实践中的肿瘤评估:缩写:ANTs = 高级归一化工具;DSC = Dice相似系数;DW-EPI = 扩散加权单发回波平面成像;DW-MS-EPI = 扩散加权多发回波平面成像;DW-SPLICE = 扩散加权快速自旋回波信号分割采集扩散成像;DW-TSE=扩散加权涡轮自旋回波;ICC=类内相关系数;ROC=接收者操作特征;SCC=鳞状细胞癌;T1WIc=T1加权钆对比成像。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信