A multiparametric computer-aided diagnosis scheme that combines information from T1-weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI and T2-weighted MRI was investigated using a database of 110 malignant and 86 benign breast lesions. Automatic lesion segmentation was performed, and three categories of l
B1 transmission-field inhomogeneity and enhancement ratio errors in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) of the breast at 3T
✍ Scribed by Che A. Azlan; Pierluigi Di Giovanni; Trevor S. Ahearn; Scott I.K. Semple; Fiona J. Gilbert; Thomas W. Redpath
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 2009
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 200 KB
- Volume
- 31
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 1053-1807
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
Abstract
Purpose:
To quantify B~1~ transmission‐field inhomogeneity in breast imaging of normal volunteers at 3T using 3D T~1~‐weighted spoiled gradient echo and to assess the resulting errors in enhancement ratio (ER) measured in dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI (DCE‐MRI) studies of the breast.
Materials and Methods:
A total of 25 volunteers underwent breast imaging at 3T and the B~1~ transmission‐fields were mapped. Gel phantoms that simulate pre‐ and postcontrast breast tissue T~1~ were developed. The effects of B~1~‐field inhomogeneity on ER, as measured using a 3D spoiled gradient echo sequence, were investigated by computer simulation and experiments on gel phantoms.
Results:
It was observed that by using the patient orientation and MR scanner employed in this study, the B~1~ transmission‐field field is always reduced toward the volunteer's right side. The median B~1~‐field in the right breast is reduced around 40% of the expected B~1~‐field. For some volunteers the amplitude was reduced by more than 50%. Computer simulation and experiment showed that a reduction in B~1~‐field decreases ER. This reduction increases with both B~1~‐field error and contrast agent uptake.
Conclusion:
B~1~ transmission‐field inhomogeneity is a critical issue in breast imaging at 3T and causes errors in quantifying ER. These errors would be sufficient to reduce the conspicuity of a malignant lesion and could result in reduced sensitivity for cancer detection. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2010;31:234–239. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES