Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 5.0 T: quantitative and qualitative comparison with 3.0 T

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 involv...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Liang Yin, ZhangZhu Li, MingYan Shang, ZongChang Li, BoWen Tang, Dan Yu, Jie Gan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2024-12-01
Series:BMC Medical Imaging
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-024-01512-0
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1846136696798707712
author Liang Yin
ZhangZhu Li
MingYan Shang
ZongChang Li
BoWen Tang
Dan Yu
Jie Gan
author_facet Liang Yin
ZhangZhu Li
MingYan Shang
ZongChang Li
BoWen Tang
Dan Yu
Jie Gan
author_sort Liang Yin
collection DOAJ
description 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.
format Article
id doaj-art-6492cf180ba54d5b9be85ed321800b0a
institution Kabale University
issn 1471-2342
language English
publishDate 2024-12-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Medical Imaging
spelling doaj-art-6492cf180ba54d5b9be85ed321800b0a2024-12-08T12:49:22ZengBMCBMC Medical Imaging1471-23422024-12-012411810.1186/s12880-024-01512-0Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 5.0 T: quantitative and qualitative comparison with 3.0 TLiang Yin0ZhangZhu Li1MingYan Shang2ZongChang Li3BoWen Tang4Dan Yu5Jie Gan6Department of Medical Imaging, Shandong Provincial Third HospitalDepartment of Medical Imaging, Shandong Provincial Third HospitalDepartment of Medical Imaging, Shandong Provincial Third HospitalDepartment of Medical Imaging, Shandong Provincial Third HospitalDepartment of Medical Imaging, Shandong Provincial Third HospitalUnited Imaging Research Institute of Intelligent ImagingDepartment of Medical Imaging, Shandong Provincial Third HospitalAbstract 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.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-024-01512-0Ultra-high field MRI5.0 TMR CholangiopancreatographyQuantitative and qualitative comparisonBiliary tree visualization
spellingShingle Liang Yin
ZhangZhu Li
MingYan Shang
ZongChang Li
BoWen Tang
Dan Yu
Jie Gan
Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 5.0 T: quantitative and qualitative comparison with 3.0 T
BMC Medical Imaging
Ultra-high field MRI
5.0 T
MR Cholangiopancreatography
Quantitative and qualitative comparison
Biliary tree visualization
title Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 5.0 T: quantitative and qualitative comparison with 3.0 T
title_full Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 5.0 T: quantitative and qualitative comparison with 3.0 T
title_fullStr Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 5.0 T: quantitative and qualitative comparison with 3.0 T
title_full_unstemmed Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 5.0 T: quantitative and qualitative comparison with 3.0 T
title_short Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 5.0 T: quantitative and qualitative comparison with 3.0 T
title_sort magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography at 5 0 t quantitative and qualitative comparison with 3 0 t
topic Ultra-high field MRI
5.0 T
MR Cholangiopancreatography
Quantitative and qualitative comparison
Biliary tree visualization
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-024-01512-0
work_keys_str_mv AT liangyin magneticresonancecholangiopancreatographyat50tquantitativeandqualitativecomparisonwith30t
AT zhangzhuli magneticresonancecholangiopancreatographyat50tquantitativeandqualitativecomparisonwith30t
AT mingyanshang magneticresonancecholangiopancreatographyat50tquantitativeandqualitativecomparisonwith30t
AT zongchangli magneticresonancecholangiopancreatographyat50tquantitativeandqualitativecomparisonwith30t
AT bowentang magneticresonancecholangiopancreatographyat50tquantitativeandqualitativecomparisonwith30t
AT danyu magneticresonancecholangiopancreatographyat50tquantitativeandqualitativecomparisonwith30t
AT jiegan magneticresonancecholangiopancreatographyat50tquantitativeandqualitativecomparisonwith30t