Clinical validation of Wave-CAIPI susceptibility-weighted imaging for routine brain MRI at 1.5 T.

OBJECTIVES: Wave-CAIPI (Controlled Aliasing in Parallel Imaging) enables dramatic reduction in acquisition time of 3D MRI sequences such as 3D susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) but has not been clinically evaluated at 1.5 T. We sought to compare highly accelerated Wave-CAIPI SWI (Wave-SWI) with two alternative standard sequences, conventional three-dimensional SWI and two-dimensional T2*-weighted Gradient-Echo (T2*w-GRE), in patients undergoing routine brain MRI at 1.5 T. METHODS: In this study, 172 patients undergoing 1.5 T brain MRI were scanned with a more commonly used susceptibility sequence (standard SWI or T2*w-GRE) and a highly accelerated Wave-SWI sequence. Two radiologists blinded to the acquisition technique scored each sequence for visualization of pathology, motion and signal dropout artifacts, image noise, visualization of normal anatomy (vessels and basal ganglia mineralization), and overall diagnostic quality. Superiority testing was performed to compare Wave-SWI to T2*w-GRE, and non-inferiority testing with 15% margin was performed to compare Wave-SWI to standard SWI. RESULTS: Wave-SWI performed superior in terms of visualization of pathology, signal dropout artifacts, visualization of normal anatomy, and overall image quality when compared to T2*w-GRE (all p < 0.001). Wave-SWI was non-inferior to standard SWI for visualization of normal anatomy and pathology, signal dropout artifacts, and overall image quality (all p < 0.001). Wave-SWI was superior to standard SWI for motion artifact (p < 0.001), while both conventional susceptibility sequences were superior to Wave-SWI for image noise (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Wave-SWI can be performed in a 1.5 T clinical setting with robust performance and preservation of diagnostic quality. KEY POINTS: • Wave-SWI accelerated the acquisition of 3D high-resolution susceptibility images in 70% of the acquisition time of the conventional T2*GRE. • Wave-SWI performed superior to T2*w-GRE for visualization of pathology, signal dropout artifacts, and overall diagnostic image quality. • Wave-SWI was noninferior to standard SWI for visualization of normal anatomy and pathology, signal dropout artifacts, and overall diagnostic image quality.

"All-in-one" window/level whole-body computed tomography scan - A faster way to evaluate trauma cases.

PURPOSE: To investigate the accuracy and total assessment time (TAT) of the "All-in-one" (AIO)-window/level setting for whole-body computed tomography (CT) image compared to multiple tissue-specific window/level settings conventionally used for detection of traumatic injuries. METHOD: Contrast-enhanced chest, abdomen, and pelvic CT scans of 50 patients who presented to our emergency department (ED) for major trauma were retrospectively selected. In a simulation of a "wet read" performed at the CT scanner console, 6 readers with different levels of experience had up to 3 min to describe any traumatic finding identified on the CTs. The readers reviewed each patient in two different sessions separated by a washout period to suppress any recall bias from one session to the next. Each scan was reviewed once using the AIO-window/level setting and another time using the conventional bone, lung, and soft tissue window/level display settings, in a randomized order. The CT reports were used as reference standard. RESULTS: Overall, there was no statistically significant difference in the assessment accuracy of the review based on the AIO or the conventional window/level settings (0.89 ± 0.09 vs 0.90 ± 0.08). Using the AIO-window/level settings, TAT was 14.3 s faster when compared with the conventional window/level settings (2.33 ± 0.63 vs 2.57 ± 0.51 min; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a time-delimited image review, similar diagnostic accuracy was reached faster using the AIO vs the conventional window/level settings. When providing a "wet read" at the CT console, the ability to identify traumatic injury using a single AIO-window/level may help expedite patient management.

Comparison of ultrafast wave-controlled aliasing in parallel imaging (CAIPI) magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition gradient echo (MP-RAGE) and standard MP-RAGE in non-sedated children: initial clinical experience.

BACKGROUND: Fast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences are advantageous in pediatric imaging as they can lessen child discomfort, decrease motion artifact and improve scanner availability. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of an ultrafast wave-CAIPI (controlled aliasing in parallel imaging) MP-RAGE (magnetization-prepared rapid gradient echo) sequence for brain imaging of awake pediatric patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Each MRI included a standard MP-RAGE sequence and an ultrafast wave-MP-RAGE sequence. Two neuroradiologists evaluated both sequences in terms of artifacts, noise, anatomical contrast and pathological contrast. A predefined 5-point scale was used by two independent pediatric neuroradiologists. A Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to evaluate the difference between sequences for each variable. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients (14 males; mean age: 11.5±4.5 years, range: 1 month to 17.8 years) were included. Wave-CAIPI MP-RAGE provided a 77% reduction in scan time using a 32-channel coil and a 70% reduction using a 20-channel coil. Visualization of the pathology, artifacts and pathological enhancement (including parenchymal, leptomeningeal and dural enhancement) was not significantly different between standard MP-RAGE and wave-CAIPI MP-RAGE (all P>0.05). For central (P<0.001) and peripheral (P<0.001) noise, and the evaluation of the anatomical structures (P<0.001), the observers favored standard MP-RAGE over wave-CAIPI MP-RAGE. CONCLUSION: Ultrafast brain imaging with wave-CAIPI MP-RAGE is feasible in awake pediatric patients, providing a substantial reduction in scan time at a cost of subjectively increased image noise.

Pediatric Emergency MRI.

There is an overall increase in the use of imaging in the pediatric emergency room setting, which is accompanied by a reduction in computed tomography examinations performed mainly due to the increased awareness of the risks of ionizing radiation. Advances in MRI technology have led to shortened scan time, decreased motion sensitivity, and improved spatial resolution. With increased access to MRI in the emergency room setting, the goal of this article is to review major applications of MR in pediatric emergency room patients.

Effect of Transcranial Low-Level Light Therapy vs Sham Therapy Among Patients With Moderate Traumatic Brain Injury: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Preclinical studies have shown that transcranial near-infrared low-level light therapy (LLLT) administered after traumatic brain injury (TBI) confers a neuroprotective response. Objectives: To assess the feasibility and safety of LLLT administered acutely after a moderate TBI and the neuroreactivity to LLLT through quantitative magnetic resonance imaging metrics and neurocognitive assessment. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized, single-center, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel-group trial was conducted from November 27, 2015, through July 11, 2019. Participants included 68 men and women with acute, nonpenetrating, moderate TBI who were randomized to LLLT or sham treatment. Analysis of the response-evaluable population was conducted. Interventions: Transcranial LLLT was administered using a custom-built helmet starting within 72 hours after the trauma. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed in the acute (within 72 hours), early subacute (2-3 weeks), and late subacute (approximately 3 months) stages of recovery. Clinical assessments were performed concomitantly and at 6 months via the Rivermead Post-Concussion Questionnaire (RPQ), a 16-item questionnaire with each item assessed on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (no problem) to 4 (severe problem). Main Outcomes and Measures: The number of participants to successfully and safely complete LLLT without any adverse events within the first 7 days after the therapy was the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes were the differential effect of LLLT on MR brain diffusion parameters and RPQ scores compared with the sham group. Results: Of the 68 patients who were randomized (33 to LLLT and 35 to sham therapy), 28 completed at least 1 LLLT session. No adverse events referable to LLLT were reported. Forty-three patients (22 men [51.2%]; mean [SD] age, 50.49 [17.44] years]) completed the study with at least 1 magnetic resonance imaging scan: 19 individuals in the LLLT group and 24 in the sham treatment group. Radial diffusivity (RD), mean diffusivity (MD), and fractional anisotropy (FA) showed significant time and treatment interaction at 3-month time point (RD: 0.013; 95% CI, 0.006 to 0.019; P < .001; MD: 0.008; 95% CI, 0.001 to 0.015; P = .03; FA: -0.018; 95% CI, -0.026 to -0.010; P < .001).The LLLT group had lower RPQ scores, but this effect did not reach statistical significance (time effect P = .39, treatment effect P = .61, and time × treatment effect P = .91). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, LLLT was feasible in all patients and did not exhibit any adverse events. Light therapy altered multiple diffusion tensor parameters in a statistically significant manner in the late subacute stage. This study provides the first human evidence to date that light therapy engages neural substrates that play a role in the pathophysiologic factors of moderate TBI and also suggests diffusion imaging as the biomarker of therapeutic response. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02233413.