Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) of the kidney at 3 tesla-feasibility, protocol evaluation and comparison to 1.5 tesla

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 45, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 245-254

  Notohamiprodjo, Mike ^a   Dietrich, Olaf ^a   Horger, Wihelm ^b   Horng, Annie ^a   Helck, Andreas D ^a   Herrmann, Karin A ^a   Reiser, Maximilian F ^a   Glaser, Christian ^a  

^a LUDWIG MAXIMILIANS UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b SIEMENS AG   (Germany)

Author keywords

3T; Diffusion tensor imaging; DTI; DWI; Kidney; Reproducibility

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTRAST; DIFFUSION TENSOR IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMAGING SYSTEM; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANK SUM TEST; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO;

EID: 77951122163     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: 15360210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181d83abc     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Kataoka M, Kido A, Yamamoto A, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging of kidneys with respiratory triggering: optimization of parameters to demonstrate aniso-tropic structures on fraction anisotropy maps. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2009;29:736-744.
2. Namimoto T, Yamashita Y, Mitsuzaki K, et al. Measurement of the apparent diffusion coefficient in diffuse renal disease by diffusion-weighted echo-planar MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;9:832-837.
3. Ries M, Jones RA, Basseau F, et al. Diffusion tensor MRI of the human kidney. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;14:42-49.
4. Notohamiprodjo M, Glaser C, Herrmann KA, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging of the kidney with parallel imaging: initial clinical experience. Invest Radiol. 2008;43:677-685.
5. Muller MF, Prasad PV, Bimmler D, et al. Functional imaging of the kidney by means of measurement of the apparent diffusion coefficient. Radiology. 1994;193:711-715.
6. Jones RA, Grattan-Smith JD. Age dependence of the renal apparent diffusion coefficient in children. Pediatr Radiol. 2003;33:850-854.
7. Thoeny HC, De Keyzer F, Oyen RH, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of kidneys in healthy volunteers and patients with parenchymal diseases: initial experience. Radiology. 2005;235:911-917.
8. Mori S, van Zijl PC. Fiber tracking: principles and strategies\a technical review. NMR Biomed. 2002;15:468-480.
9. Ludemann L, Nafz B, Elsner F, et al. Absolute quantification of regional renal blood flow in swine by dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging using a blood pool contrast agent. Invest Radiol. 2009;44:125-134.
10. Rossi C, Boss A, Artunc F, et al. Comprehensive assessment of renal function and vessel morphology in potential living kidney donors: an MRI-based approach. Invest Radiol. 2009;44:705-711.
11. Chandarana H, Lee VS, Stoffel D, et al. Evaluation of normal and dysfunctional renal transplants using DTI. Proc Intl Soc Magn Reson Med. 2009;17: 4112.
12. Cheung JS, Fan SJ, Chow AM, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging of renal ischemia/reperfusion injury. Proc Intl Soc Magn Reson Med. 2009;17:669.
13. Gloviczki ML, Glockner J, Gomez SI, et al. Comparison of 1.5 and 3 T BOLD MR to study oxygenation of kidney cortex and medulla in human renovascular disease. Invest Radiol. 2009;44:566-571.
14. Michaely HJ, Kramer H, Oesingmann N, et al. Intraindividual comparison of MR-renal perfusion imaging at 1.5 T and 3.0 T. Invest Radiol. 2007;42:406-411.
15. Chang KJ, Kamel IR, Macura KJ, et al. 3.0-T MR imaging of the abdomen: comparison with 1.5 T. Radiographics. 2008;28:1983-1998.
16. Dietrich O, Reiser MF, Schoenberg SO. Artifacts in 3-T MRI: physical background and reduction strategies. Eur J Radiol. 2008;65:29-35.
17. Alexander AL, Lee JE, Wu YC, et al. Comparison of diffusion tensor imaging measurements at 3.0 T versus 1.5 T with and without parallel imaging. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2006;16:299-309, xi.
18. Rossi C, Boss A, Lindig TM, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging of the spinal cord at 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla. Rofo. 2007;179:219-224.
19. Yoshikawa T, Kawamitsu H, Mitchell DG, et al. ADC measurements of abdominal organs and lesions using parallel imaging technique. Am J Roent-genol. 2006;187:1521-1530.
20. Siegel CL, Aisen AM, Ellis JH, et al. Feasibility of MR diffusion studies in the kidney. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1995;5:617-620.
21. Griswold MA, Jakob PM, Heidemann RM, et al. Generalized autocalibrating partially parallel acquisitions (GRAPPA). Magn Reson Med. 2002;47:1202-1210.
22. Pierpaoli C, Basser PJ. Toward a quantitative assessment of diffusion anisot-ropy. Magn Reson Med. 1996;36:893-906.
23. Makris N, Worth AJ, Sorensen AG, et al. Morphometry of in vivo human white matter association pathways with diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Neurol. 1997;42:951-962.
24. Pajevic S, Pierpaoli C. Color schemes to represent the orientation of aniso-tropic tissues from diffusion tensor data: application to white matter fiber tract mapping in the human brain. Magn Reson Med. 1999;42:526-540.
25. Dietrich O, Raya JG, Reeder SB, et al. Measurement of signal-to-noise ratios in MR images: influence of multichannel coils, parallel imaging, and reconstruction filters. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007;26:375-385.
26. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307-310.
27. Glaser C, Mendlik T, Dinges J, et al. Global and regional reproducibility of T2 relaxation time measurements in human patellar cartilage. Magn Reson Med. 2006;56:527-534.
28. Ardekani S, Sinha U. Quantitative assessment of parallel acquisition techniques in diffusion tensor imaging at 3.0 Tesla. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2004;2:1072-1075.
29. Schindera ST, Merkle EM, Dale BM, et al. Abdominal magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 T what is the ultimate gain in signal-to-noise ratio? Acad Radiol. 2006;13:1236-1243.
30. Fushimi Y, Miki Y, Okada T, et al. Fractional anisotropy and mean diffu-sivity: comparison between 3.0-T and 1.5-T diffusion tensor imaging with parallel imaging using histogram and region of interest analysis. NMR Biomed. 2007;20:743-748.
31. Jones DK, Horsfield MA, Simmons A. Optimal strategies for measuring diffusion in anisotropic systems by magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med. 1999;42:515-525.
32. Jones DK. The effect of gradient sampling schemes on measures derived from diffusion tensor MRI: a Monte Carlo study. Magn Reson Med. 2004;51:807-815.
33. Hasan KM, Parker DL, Alexander AL. Comparison of gradient encoding schemes for diffusion-tensor MRI. JMagn Reson Imaging. 2001;13:769-780.
34. Papadakis NG, Murrills CD, Hall LD, et al. Minimal gradient encoding for robust estimation of diffusion anisotropy. Magn Reson Imaging. 2000;18: 671-679.
35. Thoeny HC, De Keyzer F. Extracranial applications of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:1385-1393.
36. Le Bihan D, Breton E, Lallemand D, et al. MR imaging of intravoxel incoherent motions: application to diffusion and perfusion in neurologic disorders. Radiology. 1986;161:401-407.
37. Correia MM, Carpenter TA, Williams GB. Looking for the optimal DTI acquisition scheme given a maximum scan time: are more b-values a waste of time? Magn Reson Imaging. 2009;27:163-175.
38. Melhem ER, Itoh R, Jones L, et al. Diffusion tensor MR imaging of the brain: effect of diffusion weighting on trace and anisotropy measurements. Am J Neuroradiol. 2000;21:1813-1820.
39. Chandarana H, Lee VS. Renal functional MRI: Are we ready for clinical application? Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192:1550-1557.
40. Kwee TC, Takahara T, Koh DM, et al. Comparison and reproducibility of ADC measurements in breathhold, respiratory triggered, and free-breathing diffusion-weighted MR imaging of the liver. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008; 28:1141-1148.
41. Kwee TC, Takahara T, Ochiai R, et al. Diffusion-weighted whole-body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS): features and potential applications in oncology. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:1937-1952.
42. Takahara T, Imai Y, Yamashita T, et al. Diffusion weighted whole body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS): technical improvement using free breathing, STIR and high resolution 3D display. Radiat Med. 2004;22:275-282.
43. Braithwaite AC, Dale BM, Boll DT, et al. Short-and midterm reproducibility of apparent diffusion coefficient measurements at 3.0-T diffusion-weighted imaging of the abdomen. Radiology. 2009;250:459-465.
44. Nasu K, Kuroki Y, Fujii H, et al. Hepatic pseudo-anisotropy: a specific artifact in hepatic diffusion-weighted images obtained with respiratory triggering. MAGMA. 2007;20:205-211.
45. Jones DK, Basser PJ. Squashing peanuts and smashing pumpkins: how noise distorts diffusion-weighted MR data. Magn Reson Med. 2004;52:979-993.
46. Tijssen RH, Jansen JF, Backes WH. Assessing and minimizing the effects of noise and motion in clinical DTI at 3 T. Hum Brain Mapp. 2009;30:2641-2655
47. Murtz P, Pauleit D, Traber F, et al. [Pulse triggering for improved diffusion-weighted MR imaging of the abdomen.] Rofo. 2000;172:587-590.