Search

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., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)