Abstract
Determining the diagnostic accuracy of different MR sequences is essential to design MR imaging protocols. The purpose of the study was to compare 3T sagittal FSE T2, STIR, and T1-weighted phase-sensitive inversion recovery in the detection of spinal cord lesions in patients with suspected or definite MS. We performed a retrospective analysis of 38 patients with suspected or definite MS. Involvement of the cervical and thoracic cord segments was recorded on sagittal FSE T2, STIR, and T1-weighted phase-sensitive inversion recovery sequences independently by 2 readers. A consensus criterion standard read was performed with all sequences available. Sensitivity, specificity, and interobserver agreement were calculated for each sequence. In the cervical cord, the sensitivity of T1-weighted phase-sensitive inversion recovery (96.2%) and STIR (89.6%) was significantly higher (P < .05) than that of FSE T2 (50.9%), but no significant difference was found between T1-weighted phase-sensitive inversion recovery and STIR. In the thoracic cord, sensitivity values were 93.8% for STIR, 71.9% for FSE T2, and 50.8% for T1-weighted phase-sensitive inversion recovery. Significant differences were found for all comparisons (P < .05). No differences were detected in specificity. Poor image quality and lower sensitivity of thoracic T1-weighted phase-sensitive inversion recovery compared with the other 2 sequences were associated with a thicker back fat pad. The use of an additional sagittal sequence other than FSE T2 significantly increases the detection of cervical and thoracic spinal cord lesions in patients with MS at 3T. In the cervical segment, both STIR and T1-weighted phase-sensitive inversion recovery offer high sensitivity and specificity, whereas in the thoracic spine, STIR performs better than T1-weighted phase-sensitive inversion recovery, particularly in patients with a thick dorsal fat pad.
Highlights
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSEDetermining the diagnostic accuracy of different MR sequences is essential to design MR imaging protocols
In the cervical cord, the sensitivity of T1-weighted phase-sensitive inversion recovery (96.2%) and STIR (89.6%) was significantly higher (P Ͻ .05) than that of FSE T2 (50.9%), but no significant difference was found between T1-weighted phase-sensitive inversion recovery and STIR
This study shows that lesion detection in the cervical region is lower on sagittal FSE T2 than on phase-sensitive inversion recovery (PSIR) and STIR
Summary
The purpose of the study was to compare 3T sagittal FSE T2, STIR, and T1-weighted phase-sensitive inversion recovery in the detection of spinal cord lesions in patients with suspected or definite MS. The aim of our study was to compare the sensitivity and specificity of sagittal STIR, PSIR, and FSE T2 in the detection of MS spinal cord lesions at 3T, in both the cervical and thoracic segments
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have