1. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 5.0 T: quantitative and qualitative comparison with 3.0 T.
- Author
-
Yin L, Li Z, Shang M, Li Z, Tang B, Yu D, and Gan J
- Subjects
- Humans, Male, Prospective Studies, Female, Adult, Middle Aged, Feasibility Studies, Aged, Biliary Tract diagnostic imaging, Cholangiopancreatography, Magnetic Resonance methods, Signal-To-Noise Ratio, Artifacts
- Abstract
Background: This study aimed to assess the feasibility and performance of 5.0 T MRI in MR Cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) imaging compared to 3.0 T, focusing on detail visualization, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and image artifacts., Methods: A prospective study from May to October 2023 involved 20 healthy subjects and 19 with biliary dilation. Both groups underwent MRCP using 3.0 T and 5.0 T scanners. The detail visualization capability of the biliary tree and the SNR of the images were quantitatively evaluated. Two experienced MRI diagnostic physicians assessed the image artifacts qualitatively on a scale of 1 to 5. The t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test compared the quantitative results of biliary visualization and SNR between 3.0 T and 5.0 T scanners, while the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for comparing the level of image artifacts between the two scanners. The inter reader consistency was tested using Kappa test., Results: In both healthy subjects and those with biliary dilation, the 5.0 T group exhibited significantly higher numbers of biliary tree branches, along with greater total and maximum branch lengths, compared to the 3.0 T group (P<0.05). Although the maximum branch length was higher in the 5.0 T group among healthy subjects, this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.053). No notable differences were observed in SNR and image artifact levels between the two groups across both field strengths (P>0.05)., Conclusions: MRCP at 5.0 T offers superior biliary tree visualization compared to 3.0 T. The performance regarding SNR and image artifacts between the two is relatively comparable., Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This prospective study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Shandong Provincial Third Hospital (KYLL-2023064). All participants were informed about the study and provided written informed consent. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF