Comparison of free breathing and respiratory triggered diffusion-weighted imaging sequences for liver imaging.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) has become a useful tool in the detection, characterization, and evaluation of response to treatment of many cancers, including malignant liver lesions. DWI offers higher image contrast between lesions and normal liver tissue than other sequences. DWI images acquired at two or more b-values can be used to derive an apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC). DWI in the body has several technical challenges. This include ghosting artifacts, mis-registration and susceptibility artifacts. New DWI sequences have been developed to overcome some of these challenges. Our goal is to evaluate 3 new DWI sequences for liver imaging. AIM: To qualitatively and quantitatively compare 3 DWI sequences for liver imaging free-breathing (FB), simultaneous multislice (SMS), and prospective acquisition correction (PACE). METHODS: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed in 20 patients in this prospective study. The MR study included 3 separate DWI sequences FB-DWI, SMS-DWI, and PACE-DWI. The image quality, mean ADC, standard deviations (SD) of ADC, and ADC histogram were compared. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to compare qualitative image quality. A linear mixed model was used to compare the mean ADC and the SDs of the ADC values. All tests were 2-sided and P values of < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. RESULTS: There were 56 lesions (50 malignant) evaluated in this study. The mean qualitative image quality score of PACE-DWI was 4.48. This was significantly better than that of SMS-DWI (4.22) and FB-DWI (3.15) (P < 0.05). Quantitatively, the mean ADC values from the 3 different sequences did not significantly differ for each liver lesion. FB-DWI had a markedly higher variation in the SD of the ADC values than did SMS-DWI and PACE-DWI. We found statistically significant differences in the SDs of the ADC values for FB-DWI vs PACE-DWI (P < 0.0001) and for FB-DWI vs SMS-DWI (P = 0.03). The SD of the ADC values was not statistically significant for PACE-DWI and SMS-DWI (P = 0.18). The quality of the PACE-DWI ADC histograms were considered better than the SMS-DWI and FB-DWI. CONCLUSION: Compared to FB-DWI, both PACE-DWI and SMS-DWI provide better image quality and decreased quantitative variability in the measurement of ADC values of liver lesions.