Chemical shift imaging with in-phase and opposed-phase sequences at 3 T: what is the optimal threshold, measurement method, and diagnostic accuracy for characterizing marrow signal abnormalities?

Kumar, Neil M.; Ahlawat, Shivani; Fayad, Laura M.

doi:10.1007/s00256-018-2999-0

Cited by 23 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A quantitative drop in signal on opposed-phase imaging compared with in-phase imaging of < 15% (3 T) or 20% (1.5 T) signifies the presence of a marrow-replacing lesion, whereas a drop in signal > 15 to 20% indicates an area more consistent with red marrow or edema. 11,12 ►Fig. 1 is an example of a signal abnormality at the head-neck junction of the femur that is malignant.…”

Section: Musculoskeletal Malignanciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Value of Quantitative Musculoskeletal Imaging

Visser

Goergen

Klein

et al. 2020

Semin Musculoskelet Radiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Musculoskeletal imaging is mainly based on the subjective and qualitative analysis of imaging examinations. However, integration of quantitative assessment of imaging data could increase the value of imaging in both research and clinical practice. Some imaging modalities, such as perfusion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), diffusion MRI, or T2 mapping, are intrinsically quantitative. But conventional morphological imaging can also be analyzed through the quantification of various parameters. The quantitative data retrieved from imaging examinations can serve as biomarkers and be used to support diagnosis, determine patient prognosis, or monitor therapy.We focus on the value, or clinical utility, of quantitative imaging in the musculoskeletal field. There is currently a trend to move from volume- to value-based payments. This review contains definitions and examines the role that quantitative imaging may play in the implementation of value-based health care. The influence of artificial intelligence on the value of quantitative musculoskeletal imaging is also discussed.

show abstract

Section: Musculoskeletal Malignanciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Value of Quantitative Musculoskeletal Imaging

Visser

Goergen

Klein

et al. 2020

Semin Musculoskelet Radiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A valuable addition to anatomic sequences is chemical shift MRI with in-phase and opposed-phase image acquisition to differentiate bone marrow-replacing neoplasms from nonneoplastic conditions such as edematous or hematopoietic marrow. A signal drop of <20% (1.5 T) or <25% (3 T) on opposed-phase images relative to in-phase images is suggestive of neoplastic marrow replacement 96,97 . Importantly, at 3.0 T, the opposed-phase image should be acquired before the in-phase image because exaggerated susceptibility artifacts on a later acquired opposed-phase sequence may lead to an overestimation of the actual signal drop 98 …”

Section: Musculoskeletal Applications Of 30-t Mrimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A signal drop of <20% (1.5 T) or <25% (3 T) on opposed-phase images relative to in-phase images is suggestive of neoplastic marrow replacement. 96,97 Importantly, at 3.0 T, the opposed-phase image should be acquired before the in-phase image because exaggerated susceptibility artifacts on a later acquired opposedphase sequence may lead to an overestimation of the actual signal drop. 98 Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is a surrogate marker for tissue cellularity based on the principle that intracellular water protons are less mobile than their extracellular counterparts.…”

Section: Oncologic Magnetic Resonance Imagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Value of 3 Tesla Field Strength for Musculoskeletal Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Khodarahmi

Fritz

2021

Invest Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Musculoskeletal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a careful negotiation between spatial, temporal, and contrast resolution, which builds the foundation for diagnostic performance and value. Many aspects of musculoskeletal MRI can improve the image quality and increase the acquisition speed; however, 3.0-T field strength has the highest impact within the current diagnostic range. In addition to the favorable attributes of 3.0-T field strength translating into high temporal, spatial, and contrast resolution, many 3.0-T MRI systems yield additional gains through high-performance gradients systems and radiofrequency pulse transmission technology, advanced multichannel receiver technology, and high-end surface coils. Compared with 1.5 T, 3.0-T MRI systems yield approximately 2-fold higher signal-to-noise ratios, enabling 4 times faster data acquisition or double the matrix size. Clinically, 3.0-T field strength translates into markedly higher scan efficiency, better image quality, more accurate visualization of small anatomic structures and abnormalities, and the ability to offer high-end applications, such as quantitative MRI and magnetic resonance neurography. Challenges of 3.0-T MRI include higher magnetic susceptibility, chemical shift, dielectric effects, and higher radiofrequency energy deposition, which can be managed successfully. The higher total cost of ownership of 3.0-T MRI systems can be offset by shorter musculoskeletal MRI examinations, higher-quality examinations, and utilization of advanced MRI techniques, which then can achieve higher gains and value than lower field systems. We provide a practice-focused review of the value of 3.0-T field strength for musculoskeletal MRI, practical solutions to challenges, and illustrations of a wide spectrum of gainful clinical applications.

show abstract

“…The optimal cutoff value can be different depending on the strength of the magnetic field because the susceptibility effect increases proportionately to the magnetic field. A cutoff value of 0.75 was suggested for 3.0 T scanners, achieving a 100% sensitivity and 86% specificity to identify marrow replacement …”

Section: Chemical Shift Imaging (Csi)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A cutoff value of 0.75 was suggested for 3.0 T scanners, achieving a 100% sensitivity and 86% specificity to identify marrow replacement. 12…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

MRI biomarkers in osseous tumors

Fukuda

Wengler

Carvalho

et al. 2019

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although radiography continues to play a critical role in osseous tumor assessment, there have been remarkable advances in cross‐sectional imaging. MRI has taken a lead in this assessment due to high tissue contrast and spatial resolution, which are well suited for bone lesion assessment. More recently, although somewhat lagging other organ systems, quantitative parameters have shown promising potential as biomarkers for osseous tumors. Among these sequences are chemical shift imaging (CSI), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) from diffusion‐weighted imaging (DWI), quantitative dynamic contrast enhanced (DCE)‐MRI, and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS). In this article, we review the background and recent roles of these quantitative MRI biomarkers for osseous tumors. Level of Evidence: 3 Technical Efficacy Stage: 3 J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2019. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2019;50:702–718.

show abstract

Chemical shift imaging with in-phase and opposed-phase sequences at 3 T: what is the optimal threshold, measurement method, and diagnostic accuracy for characterizing marrow signal abnormalities?

Abstract: For 3-T CSI, a single visually targeted measurement using a 25% threshold is accurate for identifying marrow-replacing lesions.

Cited by 23 publications

References 23 publications

The Value of Quantitative Musculoskeletal Imaging

The Value of Quantitative Musculoskeletal Imaging

The Value of 3 Tesla Field Strength for Musculoskeletal Magnetic Resonance Imaging

MRI biomarkers in osseous tumors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About