RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Validation of Highly Accelerated Wave–CAIPI SWI Compared with Conventional SWI and T2*-Weighted Gradient Recalled-Echo for Routine Clinical Brain MRI at 3T
JF American Journal of Neuroradiology
JO Am. J. Neuroradiol.
FD American Society of Neuroradiology
SP 2073
OP 2080
DO 10.3174/ajnr.A6295
VO 40
IS 12
A1 Conklin, J.
A1 Longo, M.G.F.
A1 Cauley, S.F.
A1 Setsompop, K.
A1 González, R.G.
A1 Schaefer, P.W.
A1 Kirsch, J.E.
A1 Rapalino, O.
A1 Huang, S.Y.
YR 2019
UL http://www.ajnr.org/content/40/12/2073.abstract
AB BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: SWI is valuable for characterization of intracranial hemorrhage and mineralization but has long acquisition times. We compared a highly accelerated wave–controlled aliasing in parallel imaging (CAIPI) SWI sequence with 2 commonly used alternatives, standard SWI and T2*-weighted gradient recalled-echo (T2*W GRE), for routine clinical brain imaging at 3T.MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 246 consecutive adult patients were prospectively evaluated using a conventional SWI or T2*W GRE sequence and an optimized wave–CAIPI SWI sequence, which was 3–5 times faster than the standard sequence. Two blinded radiologists scored each sequence for the presence of hemorrhage, the number of microhemorrhages, and severity of motion artifacts. Wave–CAIPI SWI was then evaluated in head-to-head comparison with the conventional sequences for visualization of pathology, artifacts, and overall diagnostic quality. Forced-choice comparisons were used for all scores. Wave–CAIPI SWI was tested for superiority relative to T2*W GRE and for noninferiority relative to standard SWI using a 15% noninferiority margin.RESULTS: Compared with T2*W GRE, wave–CAIPI SWI detected hemorrhages in more cases (P < .001) and detected more microhemorrhages (P < .001). Wave–CAIPI SWI was superior to T2*W GRE for visualization of pathology, artifacts, and overall diagnostic quality (all P < .001). Compared with standard SWI, wave–CAIPI SWI showed no difference in the presence or number of hemorrhages identified. Wave–CAIPI SWI was noninferior to standard SWI for the visualization of pathology (P < .001), artifacts (P < .01), and overall diagnostic quality (P < .01). Motion was less severe with wave–CAIPI SWI than with standard SWI (P < .01).CONCLUSIONS: Wave–CAIPI SWI provided superior visualization of pathology and overall diagnostic quality compared with T2*W GRE and was noninferior to standard SWI with reduced scan times and reduced motion artifacts.CAIPIcontrolled aliasing in parallel imagingGREgradient recalled-echoMARSMicrobleed Anatomical Rating Scale