PuSH - Publikationsserver des Helmholtz Zentrums München: Qualitative and quantitative comparison of respiratory triggered reduced field-of-view (FOV) versus full FOV diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) in pancreatic pathologies.

Informationen

Hinweise zu Qualitätskriterien von Zeitschriften

Open-Access-Richtlinie der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft 2016

CC Licencences

Metriken für Publikationen

Navigation

Startseite

English

EVA: Veröffentlichen

Neuer EVA Antrag

Recherche

Erweiterte Suche

Durchblättern nach ...

... HMGU-Autoren/Konsortien

... Organisationsstruktur

... Zeitschriften

... Publikationstypen

... Forschungsdaten

... Arbeitsgruppen

... Erscheinungsjahr

Publikationen im Überblick

Statistik

HGF Fortschrittsbericht

OA Publikationen

Eintragen

Neue Publikation eintragen

Neue Publikation holen aus...

...EVA

Fehlende Publikation melden

Highlights

Suche

Hilfe & Kontakt

Ansprechpartner

Hilfe

Datenschutz

Helmholtz Open Science

Bibliometrische Indikatoren

SHERPA/RoMEO

DOAJ

Export:

Text

Endnote (RIS) BIB

BibTeX

Harder, F.N.* ; Kamal, O.* ; Kaissis, G.* ; Heid, I.* ; Lohöfer, F.K.* ; McTavish, S.* ; Van, A.T.* ; Katemann, C.* ; Peeters, J.M.* ; Karampinos, D.C.* ; Makowski, M.R.* ; Braren, R.F.*

Qualitative and quantitative comparison of respiratory triggered reduced field-of-view (FOV) versus full FOV diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) in pancreatic pathologies.

Acad. Radiol. 28, 1, S234-S243 (2021)

DOI

PMC

Open Access Green möglich sobald Postprint bei der ZB eingereicht worden ist.

Abstract
Metriken
Zusatzinfos

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of a reduced field-of-view (rFOV) acquisition in diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the pancreas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We enrolled 153 patients who underwent routine clinical MRI work-up including respiratory-triggered diffusion-weighted single-shot echo-planar imaging (DWI) with full field-of-view (fFOV, 3 × 3 × 4 mm³ voxel size) and reduced field-of-view (rFOV, 2.5 × 2.5 × 3 mm³ voxel size) for suspected pancreatic pathology. Two experienced radiologists were asked to subjectively rate (Likert Scale 1-4) image quality (overall image quality, lesion conspicuity, anatomical detail, artifacts). In addition, quantitative image parameters were assessed (apparent diffusion coefficient, apparent signal to noise ratio, apparent contrast to noise ratio [CNR]). RESULTS: All subjective metrics of image quality were rated in favor of rFOV DWI images compared to fFOV DWI images with substantial-to-high inter-rater reliability. Calculated ADC values of normal pancreas, pancreatic pathologies and reference tissues revealed no differences between both sequences. Whereas the apparent signal to noise ratio was higher in fFOV images, apparent CNR was higher in rFOV images. CONCLUSION: rFOV DWI provides higher image quality and apparent CNR values, favorable in the analysis of pancreatic pathologies.

Impact Factor

Scopus SNIP

Altmetric

3.173

1.214