Biomedical subjects

J Petersein

Publications and source records attributed to J Petersein.

23 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

PubMed1995

Fast MR imaging: technical strategies.

Since the introduction of MR imaging for medical use in the early 1980s, there has been a continuous trend toward reduction in scan times. Whereas it took over 24 hr to acquire and display the earliest MR images [1], scan times of well under a second are now feasible. The trend toward shorter scan times is based on a need to reduce motion-related artifacts, to provide more comprehensive studies in a reasonable examination time (such as those with multiple pulse sequences, multiple planes, or contrast media), or to increase patient throughput to reduce per-patient examination costs.

Humans↗

PubMed1995

Gadoteridol-enhanced MR imaging of malignant hepatic tumors: effects of triple versus standard doses on lesion-liver contrast.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare liver signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), lesion SNR, and lesion-liver contrast-to-noise-ratio (CNR) in patients with malignant liver lesions after the administration of a standard dose (0.1 mmol/kg of body weight) or a triple dose (0.3 mmol/kg) of a gadolinium chelate (gadoteridol). We hypothesized that the higher dose would produce a higher lesion-liver CNR and therefore increase the conspicuity of hepatic lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 85 patients with malignant hepatic masses (61 metastases, 22 hepatocellular carcinomas, and two lymphomas) proved by histologic or follow-up studies underwent MR imaging at 1.5 T. T1-weighted spin-echo imaging and gradient-echo imaging were done before and within 1 min after (gradient echo) as well as 5 (spin echo) and 15 (spin echo) min after the injection of 0.1 or 0.3 mmol of gadoteridol per kg, randomized before the start of the study (39 patients received the standard dose, and 46 received the triple dose). The signal intensities of the liver and lesions and the SD of background noise were measured by use of regions of interest to calculate the SNR of the liver and malignant lesions and the lesion-liver CNR. RESULTS: The lesion-liver CNR was increased significantly at 5 and 15 min after the administration of gadoteridol. No significant differences in the liver SNR, lesion SNR, and lesion-liver CNR (after 1 min: standard dose, -5 +/- 8, and triple dose, -4 +/- 14; after 5 min: standard dose, -1 +/- 5, and triple dose, 2 +/- 8; and after 15 min: standard dose, 1 +/- 5, and triple dose, 6 +/- 20) were found between the doses at all time points. CONCLUSION: Triple-dose gadoteridol does not improve the lesion-liver contrast of malignant hepatic lesions over that provided by the standard dose and is not warranted for liver MR imaging.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the liver: comparison between Gd-BOPTA and Mangafodipir.

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the MR contrast agents gadolinium benzyloxypropionictetro-acetate (Gd-BOPTA) and Mangafodipir for liver enhancement and the lesion-liver contrast on T1W spin-echo (SE) and gradient-recalled-echo (GRE) images. Fifty-one patients (three groups of 17 patients each) with known or suspected liver lesions were evaluated with T1W SE (300/12) and GRE (77-80/2.3-2.5/80 degrees) images before and after intravenous (IV) Gd-BOPTA (0.1 or 0.05 mmol/kg) or Mangafodipir (5 mumol/kg) in phase II to III clinical trials. Quantitative analysis by calculating liver signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), lesion-liver contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and spleen-liver CNR was performed. Liver SNR and spleen-liver CNR were always significantly increased postcontrast. SNR was highest after application of 0.1 mmol/kg Gd-BOPTA (51.3 +/- 3.6, P < .05). CNR was highest after Mangafodipir (-22.6 +/- 2.7), but this was not significantly different from others (P = .07). Overall, GRE images were superior to SE images for SNR and CNR. Mangafodipir and Gd-BOPTA (0.1 mmol/kg) provide equal liver enhancement and lesion conspicuity postcontrast. By all criteria, contrast-enhanced T1-weighted GRE were comparable to SE images.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Comparison of in-phase and out-of-phase gradient recalled echo T1-weighted pulse sequence for MR imaging of malignant liver masses following administration of paramagnetic gadolinium-chelate.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of in-phase and out-of-phase gradient recalled echo (GRE) pulse sequences on paramagnetic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of malignant liver lesions. METHODS: Fifty patients (27 women, 23 men; mean age = 50 +/- 27 years) with known or suspected focal liver lesions, nine of whom had a fatty liver, were examined at 1.5 T before and 60 min after injection of gadobenate dimeglumine at a dose of 0.05 or 0.1 mmol/kg using two GRE techniques: echo time of 2.3 ms (out-of-phase) or 4.6 ms (in-phase). Liver signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and lesion-liver contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were calculated. RESULTS: In patients with a nonfatty liver, liver SNR increased from 26 +/- 9 to 41 +/- 17 on in-phase images and from 28 +/- 8 to 45 +/- 14 on out-of-phase images. In patients with a fatty liver, in-phase images provided significantly higher (p < 0.01) liver SNR than did out-of-phase images predose (34 +/- 8 on in-phase vs. 21 +/- 8 on out-of-phase) and postdose (44 +/- 13 on in-phase vs. 33 +/- 14 on out-of-phase). In patients with a nonfatty liver, lesion-liver CNR was similar on in-phase and out-of-phase images, predose and postdose. In patients with fatty liver, lesion-liver CNR was significantly (p < 0.01) lower on out-of-phase images on predose and postdose images. CONCLUSION: In-phase GRE imaging is recommended for imaging focal liver lesions on paramagnetic contrast-enhanced MR imaging in patients with fatty infiltration of the liver.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Rib artifacts in electron beam tomography: incidence and severity without and with the cone beam reconstruction algorithm.

Electron beam tomography (EBT) may be compromised by rib artifacts. Two hundred forty-seven abdominal studies were performed without (Group A, n = 222) or with (Group B, n = 25) the cone beam algorithm. One hundred eighty-six (83.8%) and nine (36%) studies of Groups A and B, respectively, displayed some level of artifact. In Groups A and B, major, minor, and no artifacts were found in 115 (51.5%) and 0 (0%), 71 (32.3%) and 9 (36%), and 36 (16.2%) and 16 (64%) patients, respectively (p < 0.01). The cone beam algorithm improves EBT studies of the abdomen.

Algorithms↗