Premium
MRI of the liver: Can true FISP replace HASTE?
Author(s) -
Herborn Christoph U.,
Vogt Florian,
Lauenstein Thomas C.,
Goyen Mathias,
Debatin Jörg F.,
Ruehm Stephan G.
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
journal of magnetic resonance imaging
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.563
H-Index - 160
eISSN - 1522-2586
pISSN - 1053-1807
DOI - 10.1002/jmri.10248
Subject(s) - receiver operating characteristic , focal nodular hyperplasia , medicine , magnetic resonance imaging , radiology , diagnostic accuracy , hepatocellular carcinoma , nuclear medicine
Purpose To determine the diagnostic accuracy of two fast breath‐hold magnetic resonance (MR) imaging sequences, half‐Fourier acquired single turbo spin‐echo (HASTE) and true fast imaging with steady state precession (TrueFISP), for the detection and characterization of focal liver lesions Materials and Methods A total of 186 patients with suspected focal liver lesions were enrolled in this study. All patients underwent the same standardized study protocol including HASTE and TrueFISP. A consensus reading based on all available image data served as a standard of reference for classifying lesions into cysts, hemangiomas, focal nodular hyperplasia, or malignant/other lesions. All malignant lesions, as well as hepatic adenomas and abscesses, were histologically verified. Each separated by an eight‐week interval, HASTE and TrueFISP images were retrospectively reviewed in random order for the detection and characterization of focal hepatic lesions. Finally, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was calculated. Results HASTE images had an overall sensitivity of 0.86 and a specificity of 0.91, whereas TrueFISP showed an overall sensitivity and specificity of 0.79 and 0.83, respectively (p>0.1). Conclusion Neither HASTE nor TrueFISP alone are sufficient for the detection and characterization of hepatic lesions. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2003;17:190–196. © 2003 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.