Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison between high-resolution CT and MRI using a very short echo time in patients with cystic fibrosis with extra focus on mosaic attenuation.

BACKGROUND: It would be beneficial to establish pulmonary MRI as a complementary approach to CT for direct visualization of mosaic perfusion, bullae, and emphysema in patients with cystic fibrosis.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare both modalities, CT and MRI, using the Helbich-Bhalla score with a special focus on reliable detection of a mosaic pattern.

METHODS: Out of 51 patients examined by MRI on a 1.5-Tesla system during a period of 2 years, 19 patients were scheduled for additional low-dose CT in a clinical context. The MRI protocol comprised a gradient echo (GRE) sequence with a very short echo time (TE = 0.8 ms) in inspiration and expiration, a 3-D GRE sequence in breath hold, and a fast spin echo sequence with respiration and ECG triggering. MDCT was carried out in inspiration and adapted to body weight using 100 or 120 kV, 30-60 mA, 1- and 3-mm slice thicknesses, as well as low and high kernels. Additionally incremental slices in 3 positions were recorded in expiration for distinct detection of air trapping. CT and MRI analyses were performed by two radiologic readers in consensus unaware of the clinical parameters. The Helbich-Bhalla score of both examinations was correlated. Mean difference and accordance were assessed in each category.

RESULTS: There was a strong correlation between CT and MRI (R = 0.87, p < 0.01). The mean Helbich-Bhalla score for CT was 12.2 (range 1-18) and for MRI it was 11.7 (range 2-19). The mean difference was 0.5 points. Besides this strong correlation for findings (bronchiectasis, mucus plugging, peribronchial thickening, and consolidation) with a prolonged T2 TE in MRI, we could also state a qualitative agreement of 95-100% in the categories with short T2 and low signal intensity in MRI as emphysema, bullae, and mosaic perfusion.

CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that in our patient group none of the relevant findings were missed by MR imaging and reading.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app