scholarly journals Clinical Evaluation of Free-Breathing Contrast-Enhanced T1w MRI of the Liver using Pseudo Golden Angle Radial k-Space Sampling

2018 ◽  
Vol 190 (07) ◽  
pp. 601-609 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis Hedderich ◽  
Kilian Weiss ◽  
Judith Spiro ◽  
Daniel Giese ◽  
Gabriele Beck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Free Breathing ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Breath Hold ◽  
Diagnostic Image Quality ◽  
Liver Lesions ◽  
Diagnostic Image ◽  
Golden Angle ◽  
Contrast Enhanced ◽  
Golden Angle Radial

Purpose Contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR imaging of the liver is typically acquired using breath-hold techniques to reduce motion artifacts and to allow for optimal diagnostic image quality. Insufficient breath-holds during MR data collection can cause severe reduction of image quality up to the point of being non-diagnostic. The aim of this study was to evaluate the subjective and objective clinical image quality of a novel free-breathing radial k-space sampling MR technique. Materials and Methods Consent for this study was given by the local IRB committee. 86 patients who underwent both breath-hold (BH) and free-breathing (FB) late-phase contrast T1w-FS-FFE liver MRI using conventional BH Cartesian (Cartesian-eTHRIVE) and FB “pseudo golden angle” radial k-space sampling (Radial-eTHRIVE) were included in this retrospective analysis. Subjective analysis comprised 5-point Likert scale ratings (1 = very good; 5 = non-diagnostic) for “artifact impact”, “anatomic sharpness”, “vessel sharpness”, “contrast impression”, and “overall diagnostic quality”. Relative signal intensities in different ROIs were compared between Cartesian-eTHRIVE and Radial-eTHRIVE. For statistical differences paired Wilcoxon test and paired t-test have been performed (p < 0.05). Results The MR scan time was significantly longer for FB Radial-eTHRIVE (2 min, 54 s) compared to BH Cartesian-eTHRIVE (0 min 15 s). Cartesian-eTHRIVE demonstrated a superior subjective contrast impression and objective measurements revealed an increased lesion-to-liver-contrast for hypointense liver lesions (Hypo-LTLC: 0.33 ± 0.19 vs. 0.20 ± 0.11; p = 0.000), while no difference was observed for hyperintense liver lesions (Hyper-LTLC). Subjective evaluation showed superior anatomic sharpness ratings by both readers for Radial-eTHRIVE. Most importantly, in a subgroup analysis of patients who were unable to perform adequate breath-holds, free-breathing Radial-eTHRIVE still demonstrated good subjective image quality. Conclusion Free-breathing, radial k-space sampling T1w MRI of the liver delivers high diagnostic image quality, especially in patients who are unable to adequately perform breath-hold maneuvers. Thus, Radial-eTHRIVE can be an important clinical alternative in patients with impaired respiration status. Key points  Citation Format

scholarly journals Artefacts in contrast enhanced digital mammography: how can they affect diagnostic image quality and confuse clinical diagnosis?

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacopo Nori ◽  
Maninderpal Kaur Gill ◽  
Chiara Vignoli ◽  
Giulia Bicchierai ◽  
Diego De Benedetto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Clinical Diagnosis ◽  
Digital Mammography ◽  
Diagnostic Image Quality ◽  
Diagnostic Image ◽  
Contrast Enhanced

Pulmonary artery imaging under free‐breathing using golden‐angle radial b SSFP MRI : a proof of concept

2018 ◽  
Vol 80 (5) ◽  
pp. 1847-1856
Author(s):  
Alexander Fyrdahl ◽  
Roberto Vargas Paris ◽  
Sven Nyrén ◽  
Karen Holst ◽  
Martin Ugander ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Artery ◽  
Free Breathing ◽  
Proof Of Concept ◽  
Golden Angle ◽  
Golden Angle Radial

scholarly journals Enhancing Patient Experience With Internet Protocol Addressable Digital LED Lighting in Imaging Environments: A Phase I Study (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie U Knopp ◽  
Katherine Binzel ◽  
Chadwick L Wright ◽  
Jun Zhang ◽  
Michael V Knopp
Keyword(s):  
Image Quality ◽  
Patient Experience ◽  
Patient Comfort ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Diagnostic Image Quality ◽  
Imaging Studies ◽  
Diagnostic Image ◽  
Clinical Imaging ◽  
Ambient Lighting ◽  
Led Lights

BACKGROUND Conventional approaches to improve the quality of clinical patient imaging studies focus predominantly on updating or replacing imaging equipment; however, it is often not considered that patients can also highly influence the diagnostic quality of clinical imaging studies. Patient-specific artifacts can limit the diagnostic image quality, especially when patients are uncomfortable, anxious, or agitated. Imaging facility or environmental conditions can also influence the patient’s comfort and willingness to participate in diagnostic imaging studies, especially when performed in visually unesthetic, anxiety-inducing, and technology-intensive imaging centers. When given the opportunity to change a single aspect of the environmental or imaging facility experience, patients feel much more in control of the otherwise unfamiliar and uncomfortable setting. Incorporating commercial, easily adaptable, ambient lighting products within clinical imaging environments allows patients to individually customize their environment for a more personalized and comfortable experience. OBJECTIVE The aim of this pilot study was to use a customizable colored light-emitting diode (LED) lighting system within a clinical imaging environment and demonstrate the feasibility and initial findings of enabling healthy subjects to customize the ambient lighting and color. Improving the patient experience within clinical imaging environments with patient-preferred ambient lighting and color may improve overall patient comfort, compliance, and participation in the imaging study and indirectly contribute to improving diagnostic image quality. METHODS We installed consumer-based internet protocol addressable LED lights using the ZigBee standard in different PET/CT scan rooms within a clinical imaging environment. We recruited healthy volunteers (n=35) to generate pilot data in order to develop a subsequent clinical trial. The visual perception assessment procedure utilized questionnaires with preprogrammed light/color settings and further assessed how subjects preferred ambient light and color within a clinical imaging setting. RESULTS Technical implementation using programmable LED lights was performed without any hardware or electrical modifications to the existing clinical imaging environment. Subject testing revealed substantial variabilities in color perception; however, clear trends in subject color preference were noted. In terms of the color hue of the imaging environment, 43% (15/35) found blue and 31% (11/35) found yellow to be the most relaxing. Conversely, 69% (24/35) found red, 17% (6/35) found yellow, and 11% (4/35) found green to be the least relaxing. CONCLUSIONS With the majority of subjects indicating that colored lighting within a clinical imaging environment would contribute to an improved patient experience, we predict that enabling patients to customize environmental factors like lighting and color to individual preferences will improve patient comfort and patient satisfaction. Improved patient comfort in clinical imaging environments may also help to minimize patient-specific imaging artifacts that can otherwise limit diagnostic image quality. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03456895; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03456895

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document