3．0T MR单源与多源发射技术对肝脏成像质量影响的对比研究  

Comparison of dual-source parallel radio frequence transmission liver MRI at 3. 0 T with conventional MRI

作　　者：罗竹人[1] 王丹[1] 申宝忠[1] 孙夕林[1] 王国坤[1] 刘芳[1] 胡曙光 Queenie Chan 

机构地区：[1]哈尔滨医科大学附属第四医院放射科,150001 [2]飞利浦医疗

出　　处：《中华放射学杂志》2011年第11期1032-1035,共4页Chinese Journal of Radiology

摘　　要：目的探讨3．0T MR单源与多源发射技术对肝脏成像质量的影响。方法回顾性分析107例行3．0T MR肝脏扫描受试者的图像，检查序列包括频谱选择性衰减反转恢复T2WI（SPAIR T2WI）序列、DWI以及平衡式快速场回波（Balanced FFE）序列。每一序列均在单源和多源的激发模式下进行双重采集，采用Student’s t检验比较单多源图像的均匀性与对比度，采用Wilcoxon秩和检验比较单多源图像质量的评分。2名放射科医师独立进行阅片，采用Kappa检验比较读片者之间的诊断一致性。结果采用单源和多源发射技术测量图像的均匀性分别为418．40±66．75和416．26±50．61，多源发射技术图像均匀性优于单源发射技术，差异有统计学意义（t=2．524，P〈0．05）。单源和多源发射技术测得的信噪比（SNR）分别为20．36±11．21和22．03±12．16，对比噪声比（CNR）分别为15．22±8．95和18．33±10．01，差异均有统计学意义（t值分别为-2．630和-4．238，P值均〈0，05）。多源发射技术图像对比度优于单源发射技术图像。SPAIRT2WI序列单源和多源发射技术图像质量评分分别为（1．40±0．42）和（1．81±0．27）分，DWI序列分别为（1．08±0．46）和（1．63±0．36）分，Balanced FFE序列分别为（0．95±0．45）和（1．65±0．37）分，多源发射技术图像质量在上述3个序列中均优于单源发射技术图像（Z值分别为-5．894、-5．801和-6．985，P值均〈0．01）。2名评判医师之间的诊断一致性好（Kappa值均〉0．8，P值均〈0．05）。结论相对于单源发射技术来说，多源发射技术能够消除电解质阴影，提供更好的图像均匀性、更高的图像对比度和更佳的图像质量，3．0T多源技术在腹部成像上具有很明显的优势。Objective To investigate the role of dual-source parallel radio frequence （RF） and single-source excitation in liver imaging at 3. 0 T MR. Methods This study was a retrospective analysis. One hundred and seven subjects underwent a 3.0 T TX MR scanning including axial spectrally selective attenuated inversion recovery （SPAIR） T2WI, axial DWI and coronal balanced-fast field echo（ Balanced FFE）. Each sequence was carried out with both single-source and dual-source RF excitation. Student＇s t test was used to compare the differences between single-source and dual-source RF excitation in the image uniformity, signal-to-noise ratio （SNR） and contrast-to-noise ratio （CNR）. Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to determine whether there was difference between conventional and parallel transmission in the score of image quality. Reader agreement was assessed using the Cohen＇s Kappa test. Results For the image uniformity, there was significant difference between single-source and dual-source excitation （418.40 ± 66. 75 for single-source vs. 416. 26 ± 50. 61 for dual-source, t = 2. 524, P 〈 0. 05 ）. There also existed significant difference between single-source and dual-source excitation in SNR and CNR, respectively. The SNR and CNR of parallel transmission （22.03 ± 12. 16 and 18.33 ± 10.01, respectively） were both higher than those of single transmission （20. 36 ± 11.21 and 15.22 ± 8. 95, respectively） （t = -2. 630, P 〈0. 05 for SNR and t = - 4. 238, P 〈 0. 05 for CNR）. Image quality comparisons revealed significantly better results with dual-source than single-source RF excitation at SPAIR T2WI （ 1.40 ±0.42 vs. 1.81 ±0. 27）, DWI （1.08±0.40 vs. 1.63 ±0.36） and Balanced FFE sequence （0.95 ±0.45 vs.1.65 ±0.37,Z= -5. 894, -5. 801 and - 6. 985, respectively, P 〈 O. 01 ） . In the comparison of image quality, the agreement between the two readers was very good （ Kappa 〉 0. 8, P 〈 0. 05 ）. Conclusion Dual-source parallel RF excitation MR imaging in live

关 键 词：肝 磁共振成像 对比研究 

分 类 号：R445.2[医药卫生—影像医学与核医学]