Premium
Comparison of 2D and multislab 3D magnetic resonance techniques for measuring carotid wall volumes
Author(s) -
Keenan Niall G.,
Grasso Agata,
Locca Didier,
Roughton Michael,
Gatehouse Peter D.,
Firmin David N.,
Pennell Dudley J.
Publication year - 2008
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.21582
Subject(s) - magnetic resonance imaging , volume (thermodynamics) , lumen (anatomy) , nuclear medicine , carotid arteries , surface area to volume ratio , nuclear magnetic resonance , medicine , materials science , physics , radiology , cardiology , surgery , quantum mechanics , thermodynamics
Purpose To compare a multislab three‐dimensional volume‐selective fast spin‐echo (FSE) magnetic resonance (MR) sequence with a routine two‐dimensional FSE sequence for quantification of carotid wall volume. Materials and Methods One hundred normal subjects (50 men, mean age 44.6 years) underwent carotid vessel wall MR using 2D and 3D techniques. Carotid artery total vessel volume, lumen volume, wall volume, and wall/outer wall (W/OW) ratio were measured over 20 contiguous slices. Two‐ (2D) and three‐dimensional (3D) results were compared. Results The mean difference between 2D and 3D datasets (as a percentage of the mean absolute value) was 1.7% for vessel volume, 4.9% for lumen volume, 4.7% for wall volume, and 5.8% for W/OW ratio. There was good correlation between 2D and 3D models for total vessel volume ( R 2 = 0.93, P < 0.001), lumen area ( R 2 = 0.92, P < 0.001), and wall volume ( R 2 = 0.77, P < 0.001). The correlation for the W/OW ratio was weaker ( R 2 = 0.30; P < 0.001). The signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) for the 3D technique was 2.1‐fold greater than for the 2D technique ( P < 0.001). When using the 3D sequence, scan time was reduced by 63%. Conclusion Multislab volume selective 3D FSE carotid arterial wall imaging performs similarly to a conventional 2D technique, but with over twice the SNR and substantially reduced scan time. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2008;28:1476–1482. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.