Seow P, Kheok SW, Png MA, Chai PH, Yan TST, Tan EJ, Liauw L, Law YM, Anand CV, Lee W, Chen RC, Lim KC, Chan LP, Mohan PC. Evaluation of Compressed SENSE on Image Quality and Reduction of MRI Acquisition Time: A Clinical Validation Study.
Acad Radiol 2024;
31:956-965. [PMID:
37648581 DOI:
10.1016/j.acra.2023.07.013]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2023] [Revised: 07/02/2023] [Accepted: 07/17/2023] [Indexed: 09/01/2023]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effect of compressed SENSE (CS) in clinical settings on scan time reduction and image quality.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Ninety-five magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans from different anatomical regions were acquired, consisting of a standard protocol sequence (SS) and sequence accelerated with CS. Anonymized paired sequences were randomly displayed and rated by six blinded subspecialty radiologists. Side-by-side evaluation on perceived sharpness, perceived signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR), lesion conspicuity, and artifacts were compared and scored on a five-point Likert scale, and individual image quality was evaluated on a four-point Likert scale.
RESULTS
CS reduced overall scan time by 32% while maintaining acceptable MRI quality for all regions. The largest time savings were seen in the spine (mean = 68 seconds, 44% reduction) followed by the brain (mean = 86 seconds, 37% reduction). The sequence with maximum time savings was intracranial 3D-time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography (202 seconds, 56% reduction). CS was mildly inferior to SS on perceived sharpness, perceived SNR, and lesion conspicuity (mean scores = 2.32-2.96, P < .001 [1: SS superior; 3: equivalent; 5: CS superior]). CS was equivalent to SS for joint and body scans on overall image quality (CS = 3.02-3.37, SS = 3.04-3.68, P > .05, [1: lowest quality and 4: highest quality]). The overall image quality of CS was slightly less for brain and spine scans (mean CS = 2.79-3.05, mean SS = 3.13-3.43, P = .021) but still diagnostic. Good overall clinical acceptance for CS (88%) was noted with full clinical acceptance for body scans (100%) and high acceptance for other regions (68%-95%).
CONCLUSION
CS significantly reduced MR acquisition time while maintaining acceptable image quality. The implementation of CS may improve departmental workflows and enhance patient care.
Collapse