不同抑脂序列在3.0T乳腺MR扩散加权成像中的应用比较  

Comparison of Diffusion Weighted Images Using Different Fat Suppression Sequences At 3.0 T MRI of the Breast

作　　者：张雪梅[1] 林江[2] 叶芳[2] 姚秀忠[2] 曾蒙苏[2] 

机构地区：[1]复旦大学附属中山医院青浦分院放射科,上海201700 [2]复旦大学附属中山医院放射诊断科,上海200032

出　　处：《临床放射学杂志》2013年第8期1092-1095,共4页Journal of Clinical Radiology

摘　　要：目的比较4种不同脂肪抑制序列的3.0 T MR正常乳腺扩散加权成像(DWI)的图像质量,从而优化和筛选3.0 T乳腺MR DWI的最佳脂肪抑制技术。方法在3.0 T MRI上,分别对44例女性乳腺受检者应用选择性水激励技术(water excitation)、频率选择脂肪饱和技术(Fatsat)、反转恢复技术(IR)、频率选择反转脉冲脂肪抑制技术(Fatsat+IR)4种不同脂肪抑制序列行DWI,其他参数相同。比较不同抑脂序列的DWI图像质量,测量并计算不同抑脂序列DWI图像的乳腺组织信噪比(SNR),并进行统计学分析。结果应用water excitation的DWI图像质量平均评分为3.07±0.79,主观质量评分达到3分(可以诊断)及以上者34例,占总检查例数的77.27%;应用Fatsat的DWI图像质量平均评分为2.43±0.82,主观质量评分达到3分及以上者20例,占总检查例数的45.45%;应用IR的DWI图像质量平均评分为1.32±0.60,主观质量评分达到3分及以上者3例,占总检查例数的6.82%;应用Fatsat+IR的DWI图像质量平均评分为2.07±0.99,主观质量评分达到3分及以上者15例,占总检查例数的34.09%。统计结果显示不同抑脂序列的DWI图像质量比较差异有统计学意义(P=0.0001<0.01),两两比较显示应用Water excitation的DWI图像质量明显优于Fatsat、IR及Fatsat+IR(P值分别为0.002、0.000及0.000)。应用water excitation的DWI图像乳腺组织SNR平均为52.28±19.34,应用Fatsat的DWI图像乳腺组织SNR平均为39.93±15.07,应用IR的DWI图像乳腺组织SNR平均为23.00±7.34,应用Fatsat+IR的DWI图像乳腺组织SNR平均为28.55±9.36。统计结果显示不同抑脂序列DWI图像乳腺组织SNR差异有统计学意义(F=90.73,P=0.0000<0.01),两两比较显示应用water excitation的DWI图像乳腺组织SNR明显优于其他3组(P值均为0.000)。结论在3.0 T乳腺MR检查中,应用water excitation抑脂序列有助于改善DWI的图像质量,提高SNR。Objective To compare the image quality in normal breast DWI using four different fat suppression se quences so as to select the optimal fat suppression at 3.0 T MRI. Methods Diffusion-weighted breast images using four different fat suppression sequences （water excitation, Fatsat, IR, and Fatsat ＋ IR） were obtained in 44 females at 3.0T MRI. Image quality score and signal-to-noise ratio （SNR） with different fat suppression sequences were compared and ana- lyzed. Results Average score of the image quality of the breast DWI with water excitation was 3.07 ± 0.79. There were 34 cases with subjective quality score reaching 3 and above（diagnostic） , accounting for 77.27% of the total cases. Aver- age score of the image quality with Fatsat was 2.43 ±0. 82. There were 20 cases with subjective quality score reaching 3 and above, accounting for 45.45%. Average score with IR was 1.32 ±0.60. There were 3 cases with subjective quality score reaching 3 and above, accounting for 6.82%. Average score with Fatsat ＋ IR was 2.07 ±0.99. There were 15 cases with subjective quality score reaching 3 and above, accounting for 34.09%. The difference among the four different fat sup- pressions was statistically significant （ P --- 0. 0001 〈 0.01 ）. Higher image quality score of the breast was obtained in the group using water excitation than those using the other three fat suppression sequences, and the differences were statistically significant （ P = 0. 0002, 0. 000, 0. 000）. Average SNR of the breast DWI with water excitation was 52.28 ± 19.34, andthose of the other three groups were 39.93 ±15.07,23.00 ± 7.34 and 23.00±7.34 respectively. The difference among the four different fat suppressions was statistically significant （F = 90. 73 ,P = 0.0000 〈 0.01 ）. Higher SNR of the breast was obtained in the group using water excitation than the other three groups, and the differences were statistically significant （ P values were all 0. 000）. Conclusion DWI using water excitation is helpful for improv

关 键 词：磁共振成像 扩散加权成像 乳腺 

分 类 号：R445.2[医药卫生—影像医学与核医学]