View‐Sharing Artifact Reduction With Retrospective Compressed Sensing Reconstruction in the Context of Contrast‐Enhanced Liver MRI for Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) Screening

Background View‐sharing (VS) increases spatiotemporal resolution in dynamic contrast‐enhanced (DCE) MRI by sharing high‐frequency k‐space data across temporal phases. This temporal sharing results in respiratory motion within any phase to propagate artifacts across all shared phases. Compressed sens...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of magnetic resonance imaging 2019-04, Vol.49 (4), p.984-993
Hauptverfasser: Shaikh, Jamil, Stoddard, Paul B., Levine, Evan G., Roh, Albert T., Saranathan, Manojkumar, Chang, Stephanie T., Muelly, Michael C., Hargreaves, Brian A., Vasanawala, Shreyas S., Loening, Andreas M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background View‐sharing (VS) increases spatiotemporal resolution in dynamic contrast‐enhanced (DCE) MRI by sharing high‐frequency k‐space data across temporal phases. This temporal sharing results in respiratory motion within any phase to propagate artifacts across all shared phases. Compressed sensing (CS) eliminates the need for VS by recovering missing k‐space data from pseudorandom undersampling, reducing temporal blurring while maintaining spatial resolution. Purpose To evaluate a CS reconstruction algorithm on undersampled DCE‐MRI data for image quality and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) detection. Study Type Retrospective. Subjects Fifty consecutive patients undergoing MRI for HCC screening (29 males, 21 females, 52–72 years). Field Strength/Sequence 3.0T MRI. Multiphase 3D‐SPGR T1‐weighted sequence undersampled in arterial phases with a complementary Poisson disc sampling pattern reconstructed with VS and CS algorithms. Assessment VS and CS reconstructions evaluated by blinded assessments of image quality and anatomic delineation on Likert scales (1–4 and 1–5, respectively), and HCC detection by OPTN/UNOS criteria including a diagnostic confidence score (1–5). Blinded side‐by‐side reconstruction comparisons for lesion depiction and overall series preference (–3–3). Statistical Analysis Two‐tailed Wilcoxon signed rank tests for paired nonparametric analyses with Bonferroni‐Holm multiple‐comparison corrections. McNemar's test for differences in lesion detection frequency and transplantation eligibility. Results CS compared with VS demonstrated significantly improved contrast (mean 3.6 vs. 2.9, P 
ISSN:1053-1807
1522-2586
DOI:10.1002/jmri.26276