European Radiology Experimental (Feb 2019)

Evaluation of compressed sensing MRI for accelerated bowel motility imaging

  • C. S. de Jonge,
  • B. F. Coolen,
  • E. S. Peper,
  • A. G. Motaal,
  • C. Y. Nio,
  • I. Somers,
  • G. J. Strijkers,
  • J. Stoker,
  • A. J. Nederveen

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41747-018-0079-9
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 3, no. 1
pp. 1 – 12

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background To investigate the feasibility of compressed sensing and parallel imaging (CS-PI)-accelerated bowel motility magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to compare its image quality and diagnostic quality to conventional sensitivity encoding (SENSE) accelerated scans. Methods Bowel MRI was performed in six volunteers using a three-dimensional balanced fast field-echo sequence. Static scans were performed after the administration of a spasmolytic agent to prevent bowel motion artefacts. Fully sampled reference scans and multiple prospectively 3× to 7× undersampled CS-PI and SENSE scans were acquired. Additionally, fully sampled CS-PI and SENSE scans were retrospectively undersampled and reconstructed. Dynamic scans were performed using 5× to 7× accelerated scans in the presence of bowel motion. Retrospectively, undersampled scans were compared to fully sampled scans using structural similarity indices. All reconstructions were visually assessed for image quality and diagnostic quality by two radiologists. Results For static imaging, the performance of CS-PI was lower than that of fully sampled and SENSE scans: the diagnostic quality was assessed as adequate or good for 100% of fully sampled scans, 95% of SENSE, but only for 55% of CS-PI scans. For dynamic imaging, CS-PI image quality was scored similar to SENSE at high acceleration. Diagnostic quality of all scans was scored as adequate or good; 55% of CS-PI and 83% of SENSE scans were scored as good. Conclusion Compared to SENSE, current implementation of CS-PI performed less or equally good in terms of image quality and diagnostic quality. CS-PI did not show advantages over SENSE for three-dimensional bowel motility imaging.

Keywords