TrueFisp versus HASTE sequences in 3T cine MRI: Evaluation of image quality during phonation in patients with velopharyngeal insufficiency
- 258 Downloads
To evaluate the image quality of two fast dynamic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences: True fast imaging with steady state precession (TrueFisp) was compared with half-Fourier acquired single turbo-spin-echo (HASTE) sequence for the characterization of velopharyngeal insufficiency (VPI) in repaired cleft palate patients.
Twenty-two patients (10 female and 12 male; mean age, 17.7 ± 10.6 years; range, 9–31) with suspected VPI underwent 3-T MRI using TrueFisp and HASTE sequences. Imaging was performed in the sagittal plane at rest and during phonation of “ee” and “k” to assess the velum, tongue, posterior pharyngeal wall and a potential VP closure. The results were analysed independently by one radiologist and one orthodontist.
HASTE performed better than TrueFisp for all evaluated items, except the tongue evaluation by the orthodontist during phonation of “k” and “ee”. A statistically significant difference in favour of HASTE was observed in assessing the velum at rest and during phonation of “k” and “ee”, and also in assessing VP closure in both raters (p < 0.05). TrueFisp imaging was twice as fast as HASTE (0.36 vs. 0.75 s/image).
Dynamic HASTE images were of superior quality to those obtained with TrueFisp, although TrueFisp imaging was twice as fast.
• Dynamic MRI is an invaluable tool for diagnosing VPI.
• Dynamic HASTE images were of superior quality to those obtained with TrueFisp.
• TrueFisp imaging was twice as fast as HASTE imaging.
KeywordsVelopharyngeal insufficiency Magnetic resonance imaging Cleft palate Phonation TrueFisp HASTE
The scientific guarantor of this publication is Christiane Kulinna-Cosentini. The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. The authors state that this work has not received any funding. Dr. Michael Weber kindly provided statistical advice for this manuscript. Jacqueline C. Hodge kindly provided language advice for this manuscript. Institutional review board approval was obtained. This work was granted by the Medical-Scientific Fund of the Mayor of the federal capital Vienna.
Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects (patients) in this study. No study subjects or cohorts have been previously reported. Methodology: prospective, case-control study, performed at one institution.
- 9.Witzel MA, Stringer DA (1990) Methods of assessing velopharyngeal function. In: Bardach J, Morris HL (eds) Secondary surgical treatment of cleft palate. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 763–773Google Scholar
- 23.Hecht E, Lee VS, Tanpitukpongse TP, Babb JS, Taouli B, Wong S et al (2008) MRI of pelvic floor dysfunction: dynamic true fast imaging with steady-state precession versus HASTE. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:352–358Google Scholar
- 29.Miquel ME, Wylezinska-Arridge M, Pinkstone M (2013) Assessment of velopharyngeal closure and soft palate anatomy using MRI in cleft palate patients. Med Phys Int 1:459Google Scholar