z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Magnetic Resonance Evaluation of Multiple Myeloma at 3.0 Tesla: How Do Bone Marrow Plasma Cell Percentage and Selection of Protocols Affect Lesion Conspicuity?
Author(s) -
Miyuki Takasu,
Takayuki Tamura,
Yoko Kaichi,
Keizo Tanitame,
Yuji Akiyama,
Shuji Date,
Akira Sakai,
Yoshiaki Kuroda,
Kazuo Awai
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0085931
Subject(s) - multiple myeloma , magnetic resonance imaging , bone marrow , medicine , lesion , affect (linguistics) , pathology , plasma cell , nuclear magnetic resonance , radiology , physics , psychology , communication
Purpose To compare various pulse sequences in terms of percent contrast and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) for detection of focal multiple myeloma lesions and to assess the dependence of lesion conspicuity on the bone marrow plasma cell percent (BMPC%). Materials and Methods Sagittal T 1 -weighted FSE, fat-suppressed T 2 -weighted FSE (FS- T 2 FSE), fast STIR and iterative decomposition of water and fat with echo asymmetry and least-squares estimation (IDEAL) imaging of the lumbar spine were performed (n = 45). Bone marrow (BM)-focal myeloma lesion percent contrast and CNR were calculated. Spearman rank correlation coefficients were obtained between percent contrast, CNR and BMPC%. Percent contrasts and CNRs were compared among the three imaging sequences. Results BM-focal lesion percent contrasts, CNRs and BMPC% showed significant negative correlations in the three fat-suppression techniques. Percent contrast and CNRs were significantly higher for FS- T2 FSE than for STIR ( P <0.01, P <0.05, respectively), but no significant differences were found among the three fat-suppression methods in the low tumor load BM group. Conclusion The higher BMPC% was within BM, the less conspicuous the focal lesion was on fat-suppressed MRI. The most effective protocol for detecting focal lesions was FS- T 2 FSE. In the high tumor load BM group, no significant differences in lesion conspicuity were identified among the three fat-suppression techniques.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom