TY - JOUR
T1 - Three-Dimensional Gradient-Echo-Based Amide Proton Transfer-Weighted Imaging of Brain Tumors
T2 - Comparison with Two-Dimensional Spin-Echo-Based Amide Proton Transfer-Weighted Imaging
AU - Murayama, Kazuhiro
AU - Ohno, Yoshiharu
AU - Yui, Masao
AU - Yamamoto, Kaori
AU - Ikedo, Masato
AU - Ohba, Shigeo
AU - Hanamatsu, Satomu
AU - Iwase, Akiyoshi
AU - Ikeda, Hirotaka
AU - Hirose, Yuichi
AU - Toyama, Hiroshi
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2023/5/1
Y1 - 2023/5/1
N2 - Objective Although amide proton transfer-weighted (APTw) imaging is reported by 2-dimensional (2D) spin-echo-based sequencing, 3-dimensional (3D) APTw imaging can be obtained by gradient-echo-based sequencing. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of APTw imaging between 2D and 3D imaging in patients with various brain tumors. Methods A total of 49 patients who had undergone 53 examinations [5 low-grade gliomas (LGG), 16 high-grade gliomas (HGG), 6 malignant lymphomas, 4 metastases, and 22 meningiomas] underwent APTw imaging using 2D and 3D sequences. The magnetization transfer ratio asymmetry (MTRasym) was assessed by means of region of interest measurements. Pearson correlation was performed to determine the relationship between MTRasym for the 2 methods, and Student's t test to compare MTRasym for LGG and HGG. The diagnostic accuracy to differentiate HGG from LGG of the 2 methods was compared by means of the McNemar test. Results Three-dimensional APTw imaging showed a significant correlation with 2D APTw imaging (r = 0.79, P < 0.0001). The limits of agreement between the 2 methods were -0.021 ± 1.42%. The MTRasym of HGG (2D: 1.97 ± 0.96, 3D: 2.11 ± 0.95) was significantly higher than those of LGG (2D: 0.46 ± 0.89%, P < 0.01; 3D: 0.15 ± 1.09%, P < 0.001). The diagnostic performance of the 2 methods to differentiate HGG from LGG was not significantly different (P = 1). Conclusions The potential capability of 3D APTw imaging is equal to or greater than that of 2D APTw imaging and is considered at least as valuable in patients with brain tumors.
AB - Objective Although amide proton transfer-weighted (APTw) imaging is reported by 2-dimensional (2D) spin-echo-based sequencing, 3-dimensional (3D) APTw imaging can be obtained by gradient-echo-based sequencing. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of APTw imaging between 2D and 3D imaging in patients with various brain tumors. Methods A total of 49 patients who had undergone 53 examinations [5 low-grade gliomas (LGG), 16 high-grade gliomas (HGG), 6 malignant lymphomas, 4 metastases, and 22 meningiomas] underwent APTw imaging using 2D and 3D sequences. The magnetization transfer ratio asymmetry (MTRasym) was assessed by means of region of interest measurements. Pearson correlation was performed to determine the relationship between MTRasym for the 2 methods, and Student's t test to compare MTRasym for LGG and HGG. The diagnostic accuracy to differentiate HGG from LGG of the 2 methods was compared by means of the McNemar test. Results Three-dimensional APTw imaging showed a significant correlation with 2D APTw imaging (r = 0.79, P < 0.0001). The limits of agreement between the 2 methods were -0.021 ± 1.42%. The MTRasym of HGG (2D: 1.97 ± 0.96, 3D: 2.11 ± 0.95) was significantly higher than those of LGG (2D: 0.46 ± 0.89%, P < 0.01; 3D: 0.15 ± 1.09%, P < 0.001). The diagnostic performance of the 2 methods to differentiate HGG from LGG was not significantly different (P = 1). Conclusions The potential capability of 3D APTw imaging is equal to or greater than that of 2D APTw imaging and is considered at least as valuable in patients with brain tumors.
KW - amide proton transfer-weighted imaging
KW - brain tumors
KW - chemical exchange saturation transfer imaging
KW - magnetic resonance imaging
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85152215323&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85152215323&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/RCT.0000000000001432
DO - 10.1097/RCT.0000000000001432
M3 - Article
C2 - 36790914
AN - SCOPUS:85152215323
SN - 0363-8715
VL - 47
SP - 494
EP - 499
JO - Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography
JF - Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography
IS - 3
ER -