Reliability of fast magnetic resonance imaging for acute ischemic stroke patients using a 1.5-T scanner.

Objectives: To determine whether fast scanned MRI using a 1.5-T scanner is a reliable method for the detection and characterization of acute ischemic stroke in comparison with conventional MRI.
Methods: From May 2015 to June 2016, 862 patients (FLAIR, n = 482; GRE, n = 380; MRA, n = 190) were prospectively enrolled in the study, with informed consent and under institutional review board approval. The patients underwent both fast (EPI-FLAIR, ETL-FLAIR, TR-FLAIR, EPI-GRE, parallel-GRE, fast CE-MRA) and conventional MRI (FLAIR, GRE, time-of-flight MRA, fast CE-MRA). Two neuroradiologists independently assessed agreements in acute and chronic ischemic hyperintensity, hyperintense vessels (FLAIR), microbleeds, susceptibility vessel signs, hemorrhagic transformation (GRE), stenosis (MRA), and image quality (all MRI), between fast and conventional MRI. Agreements between fast and conventional MRI were evaluated by generalized estimating equations. Z-scores were used for comparisons of the percentage agreement among fast FLAIR sequences and fast GRE sequences and between conventional and fast MRA.
Results: Agreements of more than 80% were achieved between fast and conventional MRI (ETL-FLAIR, 96%; TR-FLAIR, 97%; EPI-GRE, 96%; parallel-GRE, 98%; fast CE-MRA, 86%). ETL- and TR-FLAIR were significantly superior to EPI-FLAIR in the detection of acute ischemic hyperintensity and hyperintense vessels, while parallel-GRE was significantly superior to EPI-GRE in the detection of susceptibility vessel sign (p value < 0.05 for all). There were no significant differences in the other scores and image qualities (p value > 0.05).
Conclusions: Fast MRI at 1.5 T is a reliable method for the detection and characterization of acute ischemic stroke in comparison with conventional MRI.
Key Points: • Fast MRI at 1.5 T may achieve a high intermethod reliability in the detection and characterization of acute ischemic stroke with a reduction in scan time in comparison with conventional MRI.