Image artifacts on prostate diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: Trade-offs at 1.5 tesla and 3.0 tesla

Academic Radiology

Volumn 20, Issue 8, 2013, Pages 1041-1047

  Mazaheri, Yousef ^a   Vargas, H Alberto ^a   Nyman, Gregory ^a   Akin, Oguz ^a   Hricak, Hedvig ^a  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Artifacts; Diffusion weighted imaging; MRI; Prostate cancer

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; GEOMETRY; HUMAN; MAGNETIC FIELD; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; STRENGTH;

ARTIFACTS; DIFFUSION-WEIGHTED IMAGING; MRI; PROSTATE CANCER;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ALGORITHMS; ARTIFACTS; DIFFUSION MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84880019476     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: 18784046     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2013.04.005     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Koh D.M., Collins D.J. Diffusion-weighted MRI in the body: applications and challenges in oncology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007, 188:1622-1635.
2. Issa B. Invivo measurement of the apparent diffusion coefficient in normal and malignant prostatic tissues using echo-planar imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002, 16:196-200.
3. Shimofusa R., Fujimoto H., Akamata H., et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of prostate cancer. J Comp Assisted Tomogr 2005, 29:149-153.
4. Sato C., Naganawa S., Nakamura T., et al. Differentiation of noncancerous tissue and cancer lesions by apparent diffusion coefficient values in transition and peripheral zones of the prostate. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005, 21:258-262.
5. Hosseinzadeh K., Schwarz S.D. Endorectal diffusion-weighted imaging in prostate cancer to differentiate malignant and benign peripheral zone tissue. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004, 20:654-661.
6. Gibbs P., Pickles M.D., Turnbull L.W. Diffusion imaging of the prostate at 3.0 tesla. Invest Radiol 2006, 41:185-188.
7. Kim C.K., Park B.K., Han J.J., et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of the prostate at 3 T for differentiation of malignant and benign tissue in transition and peripheral zones: preliminary results. J Comp Assisted Tomogr 2007, 31:449-454.
8. Vargas H.A., Akin O., Franiel T., et al. Diffusion-weighted endorectal MR imaging at 3 T for prostate cancer: tumor detection and assessment of aggressiveness. Radiology 2011, 259:775-784.
9. Kuhl C.K., Gieseke J., von Falkenhausen M., et al. Sensitivity encoding for diffusion-weighted MR imaging at 3.0 T: intraindividual comparative study. Radiology 2005, 234:517-526.
10. Gillard J.H., Papadakis N.G., Martin K., et al. MR diffusion tensor imaging of white matter tract disruption in stroke at 3 T. Br J Radiol 2001, 74:642-647.
11. Siegel R., Naishadham D., Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer JClinicians 2012, 62:10-29.
12. Cooperberg M.R., Broering J.M., Carroll P.R. Time trends and local variation in primary treatment of localized prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010, 28:1117-1123.
13. Jemal A., Ward E., Thun M. Declining death rates reflect progress against cancer. PLoS One 2010, 5:e9584.
14. Hoeks C.M., Barentsz J.O., Hambrock T., et al. Prostate cancer: multiparametric MR imaging for detection, localization, and staging. Radiology 2011, 261:46-66.
15. Barentsz J.O., Richenberg J., Clements R., et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012, 22:746-757.
16. Cornfeld D.M., Weinreb J.C. MR imaging of the prostate: 1.5T versus 3T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin North Am 2007, 15:433-448. viii.
17. Pruessmann K.P., Weiger M., Scheidegger M.B., et al. SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fast MRI. Magn Reson Med 1999, 42:952-962.
18. Sodickson D.K., Griswold M.A., Jakob P.M. SMASH imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin North Am 1999, 7:237-254. vii-viii.
19. Bammer R., Auer M., Keeling S.L., et al. Diffusion tensor imaging using single-shot SENSE-EPI. Magn Reson Med 2002, 48:128-136.
20. Noworolski S.M., Crane J.C., Vigneron D.B., et al. A clinical comparison of rigid and inflatable endorectal-coil probes for MRI and 3D MR spectroscopic imaging (MRSI) of the prostate. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008, 27:1077-1082.
21. Rosen Y., Bloch B.N., Lenkinski R.E., et al. 3T MR of the prostate: reducing susceptibility gradients by inflating the endorectal coil with a barium sulfate suspension. Magn Reson Med 2007, 57:898-904.
22. Brown J.J., Duncan J.R., Heiken J.P., et al. Perfluoroctylbromide as a gastrointestinal contrast agent for MR imaging: use with and without glucagon. Radiology 1991, 181:455-460.
23. Mitchell D.G., Vinitski S., Mohamed F.B., et al. Comparison of Kaopectate with barium for negative and positive enteric contrast at MR imaging. Radiology 1991, 181:475-480.
24. Panaccione J.L., Ros P.R., Torres G.M., et al. Rectal barium in pelvic MR imaging: initial results. J Magn Reson Imaging 1991, 1:605-607.