RESUMO
BACKGROUND: With rising breast augmentations worldwide, there is an increasing clinical need for an early and accurate detection of implant complications. PURPOSE: To compare the quality of chemical shift encoding-based (CSE) water-fat-silicone separation compared to double inversion recovery (DIR) silicone-only imaging in breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective, single-center study included women with silicone implants subjected to 3-T MRI between January 2021 and March 2022. MRI included (i) two-dimensional silicone-only T2-weighted turbo spin echo DIR acquisition and (ii) three-dimensional CSE imaging based on multi-echo gradient-echo sequence enabling water-, fat-, and silicone-image separation. Images were evaluated and compared by three independent radiologists using a clinically established rating including differentiability of the silicone implant, visibility and contouring of the adjacent fibrous capsule, and accuracy of intralesional folds in a ranking of 1-5. The apparent contrast-to-noise (aCNR) was calculated. RESULTS: In 71 women, the average quality of water-fat-silicone images from CSE imaging was assessed as "good" (assessment 4 ± 0.9). In 68 (96%) patients, CSE imaging achieved a concise delineation of the silicone implant and precise visualization of the fibrous capsule that was not distinguishable in DIR imaging. Implant ruptures were more easily detected in CSE imaging. The aCNR was higher in CSE compared to DIR imaging (18.43 ± 9.8 vs. 14.73 ± 2.5; P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Intrinsically co-registered water-fat-silicone-separated CSE-based images enable a reliable assessment of silicone implants. The simultaneously improved differentiability of the implant and fibrous capsule may provide clinicians with a valuable tool for an accurate evaluation of implant integrity and early detection of potential complications.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The four-dimensional ultrasound (4D-US) enables imaging of the aortic segment and simultaneous determination of the wall expansion. The method shows a high spatial and temporal resolution, but its in vivo reliability is so far unknown for low-measure values. The present study determines the intraobserver repeatability and interobserver reproducibility of 4D-US in the atherosclerotic and non-atherosclerotic infrarenal aorta. METHODS: In all, 22 patients with non-aneurysmal aorta were examined by an experienced examiner and a medical student. After registration of 4D images, both the examiners marked the aortic wall manually before the commercially implemented speckle tracking algorithm was applied. The cyclic changes of the aortic diameter and circumferential strain were determined with the help of custom-made software. The reliability of 4D-US was tested by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: The 4D-US measurements showed very good reliability for the maximum aortic diameter and the circumferential strain for all patients and for the non-atherosclerotic aortae (ICC >0.7), but low reliability for circumferential strain in calcified aortae (ICC = 0.29). The observer- and masking-related variances for both maximum diameter and circumferential strain were close to zero. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the low-measured values, the high spatial and temporal resolution of the 4D-US enables a reliable evaluation of cyclic diameter changes and circumferential strain in non-aneurysmal aortae independent from the observer experience but with some limitations for calcified aortae. The 4D-US opens up a new perspective with regard to noninvasive, in vivo assessment of kinematic properties of the vessel wall in the abdominal aorta.
