Prospective comparison of brain tumor detection and characterization using post-contrast Dixon uT1RESS and MPRAGE at 3 Tesla

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Adrienn Tóth , Robert R. Edelman , Muhammad Taha Hagar , Dmitrij Kravchenko , Milán Vecsey-Nagy , James Ira Griggers , Jonathan Eernisse , Tilman Emrich , M. Vittoria Spampinato , Akos Varga-Szemes
{"title":"Prospective comparison of brain tumor detection and characterization using post-contrast Dixon uT1RESS and MPRAGE at 3 Tesla","authors":"Adrienn Tóth ,&nbsp;Robert R. Edelman ,&nbsp;Muhammad Taha Hagar ,&nbsp;Dmitrij Kravchenko ,&nbsp;Milán Vecsey-Nagy ,&nbsp;James Ira Griggers ,&nbsp;Jonathan Eernisse ,&nbsp;Tilman Emrich ,&nbsp;M. Vittoria Spampinato ,&nbsp;Akos Varga-Szemes","doi":"10.1016/j.ejrad.2025.112283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>This study aimed to evaluate the image quality and lesion characterization with Dixon unbalanced T1 relaxation-enahnced steady-state (uT1RESS) in comparison to magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition gradient echo (MPRAGE) pulse sequence for detecting brain tumors, focusing on its potential to improve diagnostic accuracy and enhance brain tumor assessment.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This single-center prospective study enrolled 20 patients (12 males, aged 35–83), with primary brain tumors and brain metastases. Both MPRAGE and Dixon uT1RESS were acquired at 3 T. Objective image quality was assessed by contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), tumor-to-brain contrast, and tumor volume. Subjective image quality was assessed by two independent readers focusing on lesion visibility, lesion margins, motion, and static artifacts. A side-by-side comparison assessed diagnostic performance regarding lesion detection, evaluation of internal structure and vascular or dural invasion.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Dixon uT1RESS had a reduced acquisition time (2 min 51 s vs. 4 min 52 s for MPRAGE) and showed significantly higher CNR and tumor-to-brain contrast compared to MPRAGE (p &lt; 0.001). Subjectively, both sequences showed similar overall image quality. Dixon uT1RESS achieved more conspicuous lesions with better-defined lesion margins (p &lt; 0.001), while MPRAGE performed better in evaluating internal lesion structure (p &lt; 0.05). Dixon uT1RESS was rated better for lesion detection, with three lesions additionally identified on this sequence. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to assess differences.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Dixon uT1RESS significantly improved tumor conspicuity and detection, particularly for small metastatic lesions. This new technique offers promising potential for enhancing clinical brain tumor imaging, though additional sequences may be necessary for comprehensive lesion characterization.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12063,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Radiology","volume":"191 ","pages":"Article 112283"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0720048X25003699","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the image quality and lesion characterization with Dixon unbalanced T1 relaxation-enahnced steady-state (uT1RESS) in comparison to magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition gradient echo (MPRAGE) pulse sequence for detecting brain tumors, focusing on its potential to improve diagnostic accuracy and enhance brain tumor assessment.

Methods

This single-center prospective study enrolled 20 patients (12 males, aged 35–83), with primary brain tumors and brain metastases. Both MPRAGE and Dixon uT1RESS were acquired at 3 T. Objective image quality was assessed by contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), tumor-to-brain contrast, and tumor volume. Subjective image quality was assessed by two independent readers focusing on lesion visibility, lesion margins, motion, and static artifacts. A side-by-side comparison assessed diagnostic performance regarding lesion detection, evaluation of internal structure and vascular or dural invasion.

Results

Dixon uT1RESS had a reduced acquisition time (2 min 51 s vs. 4 min 52 s for MPRAGE) and showed significantly higher CNR and tumor-to-brain contrast compared to MPRAGE (p < 0.001). Subjectively, both sequences showed similar overall image quality. Dixon uT1RESS achieved more conspicuous lesions with better-defined lesion margins (p < 0.001), while MPRAGE performed better in evaluating internal lesion structure (p < 0.05). Dixon uT1RESS was rated better for lesion detection, with three lesions additionally identified on this sequence. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to assess differences.

Conclusions

Dixon uT1RESS significantly improved tumor conspicuity and detection, particularly for small metastatic lesions. This new technique offers promising potential for enhancing clinical brain tumor imaging, though additional sequences may be necessary for comprehensive lesion characterization.

Abstract Image

对比后使用Dixon uT1RESS和MPRAGE在3特斯拉时检测和表征脑肿瘤的前瞻性比较
目的本研究旨在评价Dixon不平衡T1弛豫增强稳态(uT1RESS)与磁化制备快速采集梯度回波(MPRAGE)脉冲序列检测脑肿瘤的图像质量和病变特征,重点研究其在提高诊断准确性和增强脑肿瘤评估方面的潜力。方法本研究纳入20例原发性脑肿瘤和脑转移患者,其中男性12例,年龄35-83岁。在3 t时获得MPRAGE和Dixon uT1RESS,通过对比噪声比(CNR)、肿瘤与脑对比和肿瘤体积评估客观图像质量。主观图像质量由两名独立的读者评估,主要关注病变可见性、病变边缘、运动和静态伪影。并排比较评估了病变检测、内部结构评估和血管或硬脑膜侵犯的诊断性能。结果与MPRAGE相比,dixon uT1RESS的采集时间缩短(MPRAGE为2分51秒,MPRAGE为4分52秒),CNR和肿瘤-脑对比显著提高(p <;0.001)。主观上,两个序列的整体图像质量相似。Dixon uT1RESS病变更明显,病灶边缘更明确(p <;0.001),而MPRAGE在评估内部病变结构方面表现更好(p <;0.05)。Dixon uT1RESS在病变检测方面被评为更好,在该序列上额外识别了三个病变。采用Wilcoxon符号秩检验评估差异。结论dixon uT1RESS可显著提高肿瘤的显著性和检出率,尤其是对小转移灶。这项新技术为增强临床脑肿瘤成像提供了有希望的潜力,尽管可能需要额外的序列来全面表征病变。
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
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
3.00%
发文量
398
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: European Journal of Radiology is an international journal which aims to communicate to its readers, state-of-the-art information on imaging developments in the form of high quality original research articles and timely reviews on current developments in the field. Its audience includes clinicians at all levels of training including radiology trainees, newly qualified imaging specialists and the experienced radiologist. Its aim is to inform efficient, appropriate and evidence-based imaging practice to the benefit of patients worldwide.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信