Skip to main content
Log in

Clinical application of navigator-gated three-dimensional balanced turbo-field-echo magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 3 T: prospective intraindividual comparison with 1.5 T

  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate and compare the clinical utility of balanced turbo-field-echo (BTFE) magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) sequences obtained at 3 and 1.5 T.

Methods

We acquired three-dimensional (3D) BTFE MRCP scans with a navigator-gated technique at 3 T on a different day after 1.5 T in 39 consecutive patients. Two radiologists independently rated the image quality and visibility of anatomical structures (right and left hepatic duct, cystic duct, gallbladder, common bile duct, and main pancreatic duct) using a four-point scale. For quantitative analysis, the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and acquisition time were evaluated.

Results

All visual scores tended to be higher for 1.5 T than 3 T images. There was a significant difference in the image quality and the depiction of the main pancreatic duct (p < 0.01). The image acquisition time was significantly shorter for 3 T than 1.5 T (199.3 ± 40.1 vs. 264.0 ± 86.5 s, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in SNR and CNR.

Conclusions

3D-BTFE MRCP scans acquired at 3 T were of sufficient image quality with respect to the biliary tree. SNR and CNR were comparable on 3 and 1.5 T scans, although the acquisition time was significantly shorter with the 3 T scanner.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Taylor AC, Little AF, Hennessy OF, et al. (2002) Prospective assessment of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for noninvasive imaging of the biliary tree. Gastrointest Endosc 55:17–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Limanond P, Raman SS, Ghobrial RM, et al. (2004) The utility of MRCP in preoperative mapping of biliary anatomy in adult-to-adult living related liver transplant donors. J Magn Reson Imaging 19:209–215

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sodickson A, Mortele KJ, Barish MA, et al. (2006) Three-dimensional fast-recovery fast spin-echo MRCP: comparison with two-dimensional single-shot fast spin-echo techniques. Radiology 238:549–559

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Nakaura T, Kidoh M, Maruyama N, et al. (2013) Usefulness of the SPACE pulse sequence at 1.5T MR cholangiography: comparison of image quality and image acquisition time with conventional 3D-TSE sequence. J Magn Reson Imaging 38:1014–1019

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Arizono S, Isoda H, Maetani YS, et al. (2008) High-spatial-resolution three-dimensional MR cholangiography using a high-sampling-efficiency technique (SPACE) at 3T: comparison with the conventional constant flip angle sequence in healthy volunteers. J Magn Reson Imaging 28:685–690

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Arizono S, Isoda H, Maetani YS, et al. (2010) High spatial resolution 3D MR cholangiography with high sampling efficiency technique (SPACE): comparison of 3T vs. 1.5T. Eur J Radiol 73:114–118

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Itatani R, Namimoto T, Kajihara H, et al. (2013) Preoperative evaluation of the cystic duct for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: comparison of navigator-gated prospective acquisition correction- and conventional respiratory-triggered techniques at free-breathing 3D MR cholangiopancreatography. Eur Radiol 23:1911–1918

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Matsunaga K, Ogasawara G, Tsukano M, et al. (2012) Usefulness of the navigator-echo triggering technique for free-breathing three-dimensional magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. Magn Reson Imaging 31:396–400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Glockner JF, Lee CU (2014) Balanced steady state-free precession (b-SSFP) imaging for MRCP: techniques and applications. Abdom Imaging 39:1309–1322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Glockner JF, Saranathan M, Bayram E, et al. (2013) Breath-held MR cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) using a 3D Dixon fat-water separated balanced steady state free precession sequence. Magn Reson Imaging 31:1263–1270

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Schick F (2005) Whole-body MRI at high field: technical limits and clinical potential. Eur Radiol 15:946–959

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Merkle EM, Dale BM (2006) Abdominal MRI at 3.0 T: the basics revisited. Am J Roentgenol 186:1524–1532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kuhl CK, Traber F, Schild HH (2008) Whole-body high-field-strength (3.0-T) MR imaging in clinical practice. Part I. Technical considerations and clinical applications. Radiology 246:675–696

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Merkle EM, Haugan PA, Thomas J, et al. (2006) 3.0-versus 1.5-T MR cholangiography: a pilot study. Am J Roentgenol 186:516–521

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. O’Regan DP, Fitzgerald J, Allsop J, et al. (2005) A comparison of MR cholangiopancreatography at 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla. Br J Radiol 78:894–898

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Isoda H, Kataoka M, Maetani Y, et al. (2007) MRCP imaging at 3.0 T vs. 1.5 T: preliminary experience in healthy volunteers. J Magn Reson Imaging 25:1000–1006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Itatani R, Namimoto T, Takaoka H, et al. (2015) Clinical impact of 3-dimensional balanced turbo-field-echo magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 3 T: prospective intraindividual comparison with 3-dimensional turbo-spin-echo magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 39:19–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lanzman RS, Kropil P, Schmitt P, et al. (2012) Nonenhanced ECG-gated time-resolved 4D steady-state free precession (SSFP) MR angiography (MRA) of cerebral arteries: comparison at 1.5 T and 3 T. Eur J Radiol 81:e531–e535

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zho SY, Park J, Choi JY, et al. (2010) Respiratory motion compensated MR cholangiopancreatography at 3.0 Tesla. J Magn Reson Imaging 32:726–732

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ryo Itatani.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This prospective study received institutional review board's approval.

Informed consent

Prior informed consent for their participation was obtained from all patients.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Itatani, R., Namimoto, T., Atsuji, S. et al. Clinical application of navigator-gated three-dimensional balanced turbo-field-echo magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 3 T: prospective intraindividual comparison with 1.5 T. Abdom Radiol 41, 1285–1292 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0633-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0633-3

Keywords

Navigation