Preliminary clinical experience at 3 T with a 3D T2-weighted sequence compared with multiplanar 2D for evaluation of the female pelvis.
Academic Article
Overview
abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to compare 3D T2-weighted sampling perfection with application-optimized contrast with different flip-angle evolutions (SPACE) with three-plane 2D turbo-spin echo (TSE) sequences for female pelvic imaging at 3 T. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty women were imaged with 2D TSE and 3D SPACE sequences. Three radiologists independently assessed image quality, diagnostic quality, and artifacts; measured normal anatomic structures; evaluated pathologic abnormalities; and recorded interpretation time. Readers subsequently performed a side-by-side comparison, and their preferences were graded according to overall interpretation, sharpness of lesion edges, motion and other artifacts, uterine and cervical zonal anatomy distinction, identification of adnexal pathologic abnormalities, and distinction between fat and fluid. Quantitative comparison of relative signal intensity and relative tissue contrast was performed. RESULTS: The mean acquisition time of 3D SPACE was significantly shorter than that of 2D TSE (6 minutes 35 seconds vs 8 minutes 50 seconds; p < 0.005). Intrareader agreement between interpretations of 2D and 3D sequences was excellent. There were no significant differences among readers in detecting artifacts, normal structures, and pathologic abnormalities or in determining endometrial thickness, image quality, or interpretation time (p > 0.05). Except for distinctions between fat and fluid, the average reader score indicated a slight preference for the 3D sequence. Three-dimensional multiplanar reconstructions were helpful but not considered essential. Relative agreement between readers was moderate (r ≥ 0.4) to strong (r ≥ 0.7). The relative signal intensity was higher for fat and bladder fluid on the 3D sequence than on the 2D sequence (p = 0.014 and p = 0.018, respectively). Relative tissue contrast was higher for the 3D sequence (p < 0.05), with no significant difference in bladder or fat contrast (p = 0.31) but a trend toward more superior contrast on the 2D sequence. CONCLUSION: At 3 T, 3D SPACE has similar image quality and diagnostic quality with shorter scan time when compared with 2D TSE but with reduced contrast between fat and fluid.
