• Shinji Naganawa, Tokiko Koshikawa, Tatsuya Nakamura, Hisashi Kawai, Hiroshi Fukatsu, Takeo Ishigaki, Tomomi Komada, Katsuya Maruyama, and Osamu Takizawa.
• Department of Radiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, 65 Tsurumai-cho, Shouwa-ku, Nagoya, Japan. naganawa@med.nagoya-u.ac.jp
• Eur Radiol. 2004 Oct 1;14(10):1901-8.

AbstractIt has been reported that 3D-FLAIR can reduce the flow artifact resulting from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) at 1.5 T compared to 2D-FLAIR. Flow-related artifacts tend to be worse at 3 T than at 1.5 T. The purpose of this study was to compare the CSF flow artifacts of 2D-FLAIR and 3D-FLAIR sequences at 3 T in eight healthy volunteers. The grade of CSF-related artifacts were scored through observing the perimedullary cistern, cerebellopontine angle cisterns, fourth ventricule, prepontine cistern, suprasellar cistern, ambient cisterns, sylvian fissures, third ventricle and lateral ventricles. Grading was performed on either axial or sagittal images. The CSF in-flow artifact scores were significantly higher on axial 2D-FLAIR than on axial 3D-FLAIR MPR images in all areas except the bilateral sylvian fissures, and higher on sagittal 2D-FLAIR than on sagittal 3D-FLAIR MPR images in perimedullary, bilateral CP angle and suprasellar cisterns. The CSF-related flow artifacts were significantly reduced by 3D-FLAIR, while structures in the cistern were depicted more clearly, even at 3 T. Further study is necessary to compare the clinical efficacy between 2D-FLAIR and 3D-FLAIR in depicting subtle abnormalities.Copyright 2004 Springer-Verlag

38 keywords...

hide…