{"title":"Comparative evaluation of zoomed and parallel diffusion-weighted imaging: A phantom study.","authors":"Akiyoshi Iwase, Yasuo Takatsu, Naoki Ohno, Azusa Kitao, Tosiaki Miyati","doi":"10.25259/JCIS_92_2025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Single-shot echo-planar imaging sequences with parallel imaging are widely used for diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). However, when small fields of view and higher phase-encoding reduction ratios (PRs) are applied, image quality may deteriorate because of imperfections in the unfolding process of parallel imaging. Previous studies have suggested that Zoomed DWI (Zoom-DWI) may address this limitation. Therefore, we compared Zoom-DWI with parallel DWI (Parallel-DWI) across different PRs to evaluate image quality.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Zoom-DWI and Parallel-DWI were performed using identical acquisition times and imaging parameters at different PRs. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), image uniformity, slice thickness, spatial resolution, and image distortion were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At a PR of 66.6%, the SNR of Zoom-DWI was approximately 1.4-3.3-fold higher than that of Parallel-DWI at the image center, where reconstruction errors in parallel imaging become more pronounced as PR increases. Image uniformity was also higher in Zoom-DWI than in Parallel-DWI, and the difference increased by approximately 41.0% at a PR of 66.6%. Slice thickness, spatial resolution, and image distortion were comparable between the two methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this phantom study, Zoom-DWI demonstrated higher SNR and greater image uniformity than Parallel-DWI, particularly at higher PRs and in the central image region.</p>","PeriodicalId":15512,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Imaging Science","volume":"16 ","pages":"30"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13540797/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Imaging Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/JCIS_92_2025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: Single-shot echo-planar imaging sequences with parallel imaging are widely used for diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI). However, when small fields of view and higher phase-encoding reduction ratios (PRs) are applied, image quality may deteriorate because of imperfections in the unfolding process of parallel imaging. Previous studies have suggested that Zoomed DWI (Zoom-DWI) may address this limitation. Therefore, we compared Zoom-DWI with parallel DWI (Parallel-DWI) across different PRs to evaluate image quality.
Material and methods: Zoom-DWI and Parallel-DWI were performed using identical acquisition times and imaging parameters at different PRs. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), image uniformity, slice thickness, spatial resolution, and image distortion were evaluated.
Results: At a PR of 66.6%, the SNR of Zoom-DWI was approximately 1.4-3.3-fold higher than that of Parallel-DWI at the image center, where reconstruction errors in parallel imaging become more pronounced as PR increases. Image uniformity was also higher in Zoom-DWI than in Parallel-DWI, and the difference increased by approximately 41.0% at a PR of 66.6%. Slice thickness, spatial resolution, and image distortion were comparable between the two methods.
Conclusion: In this phantom study, Zoom-DWI demonstrated higher SNR and greater image uniformity than Parallel-DWI, particularly at higher PRs and in the central image region.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Clinical Imaging Science (JCIS) is an open access peer-reviewed journal committed to publishing high-quality articles in the field of Imaging Science. The journal aims to present Imaging Science and relevant clinical information in an understandable and useful format. The journal is owned and published by the Scientific Scholar. Audience Our audience includes Radiologists, Researchers, Clinicians, medical professionals and students. Review process JCIS has a highly rigorous peer-review process that makes sure that manuscripts are scientifically accurate, relevant, novel and important. Authors disclose all conflicts, affiliations and financial associations such that the published content is not biased.