scholarly journals Comparison of conventional DCE-MRI and a novel golden-angle radial multicoil compressed sensing method for the evaluation of breast lesion conspicuity

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 1746-1752 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Heacock ◽  
Yiming Gao ◽  
Samantha L. Heller ◽  
Amy N. Melsaether ◽  
James S. Babb ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Compressed Sensing ◽  
Breast Lesion ◽  
Dce Mri ◽  
Golden Angle ◽  
Lesion Conspicuity ◽  
Golden Angle Radial

scholarly journals Accelerated mono‐ and biexponential 3D‐T1ρ relaxation mapping of knee cartilage using golden angle radial acquisitions and compressed sensing

2019 ◽  
Vol 83 (4) ◽  
pp. 1291-1309 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcelo V. W. Zibetti ◽  
Azadeh Sharafi ◽  
Ricardo Otazo ◽  
Ravinder R. Regatte
Keyword(s):  
Compressed Sensing ◽  
Knee Cartilage ◽  
Golden Angle ◽  
Golden Angle Radial

scholarly journals Does GRASP affect DCE-MRI for assessing response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with esophageal cancer?

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanan Lu ◽  
Ling Ma ◽  
Jianjun QIN ◽  
Zhaoqi Wang ◽  
Jia Guo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Images ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Dce Mri ◽  
Low Correlation ◽  
Golden Angle ◽  
Response Groups ◽  
Response To Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Golden Angle Radial

Abstract Purpose To compare the value of two dynamic contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Images (DCE-MRI) reconstruction approaches, namely golden-angle radial sparse parallel (GRASP) and view-sharing with golden-angle radial profile (VS-GR) reconstruction, and explore their values in assessing response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) in esophageal cancer (EC). Methods The study prospectively enrolled EC patients receiving nCT before surgery. DCE-MRI scanning was performed after nCT and within 1 week before surgery. Chemotherapy response was assessed according to Tumor Regression Grade (TRG), and patients were stratified into a responsive group (TRG1+2) and a non-responsive group (TRG3+4+5). Wilcoxon test was utilized for comparing GRASP and VS-GR reconstruction, and Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney test was performed for each parameter to assess response, and Spearman test was performed for analyzing correlation between parameters and TRGs, as well as responder and non-responder. Results Among the 64 patients included in this cohort (52 male, 12 female; average age of 59.1±7.9 years), 4 patients showed TRG1, 4 patients were TRG2, 7 patients were TRG3, 11 patients were TRG4, and 38 patients were TRG5. They were stratified into 8 responders and 56 non-responders. A total of 15 parameters were calculated from each tumor. With VSGR, 10/15 parameters significantly correlated with TRG and response groups. Of these, only AUCmax showed moderate correlation with TRG, 7 showed low correlation and 2 showed negligible correlation with TRG. 8 showed low correlation and 2 showed negligible correlation with response groups. With GRASP, 13/15 parameters significantly correlated with TRG and response groups. Of these, 10 showed low correlation and 3 showed negligible correlation with TRG. 11 showed low correlation and 2 showed negligible correlation with TRG. Conclusion In patients with esophageal cancer on neoadjuvant chemotherapy, several parameters can differentiate responders from non-responders, using both GRASP and VS-GR techniques. GRASP may be able to better differentiate these two groups compared to VS-GR.

scholarly journals The value of GRASP on DCE-MRI for assessing response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with esophageal cancer

BMC Cancer ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanan Lu ◽  
Ling Ma ◽  
Jianjun Qin ◽  
Zhaoqi Wang ◽  
Jia Guo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Images ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Dce Mri ◽  
Low Correlation ◽  
Golden Angle ◽  
Response Groups ◽  
Response To Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Golden Angle Radial

Abstract Background To compare the value of two dynamic contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Images (DCE-MRI) reconstruction approaches, namely golden-angle radial sparse parallel (GRASP) and view-sharing with golden-angle radial profile (VS-GR) reconstruction, and evaluate their values in assessing response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) in patients with esophageal cancer (EC). Methods EC patients receiving nCT before surgery were enrolled prospectively. DCE-MRI scanning was performed after nCT and within 1 week before surgery. Tumor Regression Grade (TRG) was used for chemotherapy response evaluation, and patients were stratified into a responsive group (TRG1 + 2) and a non-responsive group (TRG3 + 4 + 5). Wilcoxon test was utilized for comparing GRASP and VS-GR reconstruction, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney test was performed for each parameter to assess response, and Spearman test was performed for analyzing correlation between parameters and TRGs, as well as responder and non-responder. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) was utilized for each significant parameter to assess its accuracy between responders and non-responders. Results Among the 64 patients included in this cohort (52 male, 12 female; average age of 59.1 ± 7.9 years), 4 patients showed TRG1, 4 patients were TRG2, 7 patients were TRG3, 11 patients were TRG4, and 38 patients were TRG5. They were stratified into 8 responders and 56 non-responders. A total of 15 parameters were calculated from each tumor. With VS-GR, 10/15 parameters significantly correlated with TRG and response groups. Of these, only AUCmax showed moderate correlation with TRG, 7 showed low correlation and 2 showed negligible correlation with TRG. 8 showed low correlation and 2 showed negligible correlation with response groups. With GRASP, 13/15 parameters significantly correlated with TRG and response groups. Of these, 10 showed low correlation and 3 showed negligible correlation with TRG. 11 showed low correlation and 2 showed negligible correlation with TRG. Seven parameters (AUC* > 0.70, P < 0.05) showed good performance in response groups. Conclusions In patients with esophageal cancer on neoadjuvant chemotherapy, several parameters can differentiate responders from non-responders, using both GRASP and VS-GR techniques. GRASP may be able to better differentiate these two groups compared to VS-GR. Trial registration for this prospective study: ChiCTR, ChiCTR-DOD-14005308. Registered 2 October 2014.

scholarly journals The value of GRASP on DCE-MRI for assessing response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with esophageal cancer

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanan Lu ◽  
Ling Ma ◽  
Jianjun QIN ◽  
Zhaoqi Wang ◽  
Jia Guo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Images ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Dce Mri ◽  
Low Correlation ◽  
Golden Angle ◽  
Response Groups ◽  
Response To Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Golden Angle Radial

Abstract Background To compare the value of two dynamic contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Images (DCE-MRI) reconstruction approaches, namely golden-angle radial sparse parallel (GRASP) and view-sharing with golden-angle radial profile (VS-GR) reconstruction, and evaluate their values in assessing response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) in patients with esophageal cancer (EC). Methods EC patients receiving nCT before surgery were enrolled prospectively. DCE-MRI scanning was performed after nCT and within 1 week before surgery. Tumor Regression Grade (TRG) was used for chemotherapy response evaluation, and patients were stratified into a responsive group (TRG1+2) and a non-responsive group (TRG3+4+5). Wilcoxon test was utilized for comparing GRASP and VS-GR reconstruction, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney test was performed for each parameter to assess response, and Spearman test was performed for analyzing correlation between parameters and TRGs, as well as responder and non-responder. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) was utilized for each significant parameter to assess its accuracy between responders and non-responders. Results Among the 64 patients included in this cohort (52 male, 12 female; average age of 59.1±7.9 years), 4 patients showed TRG1, 4 patients were TRG2, 7 patients were TRG3, 11 patients were TRG4, and 38 patients were TRG5. They were stratified into 8 responders and 56 non-responders. A total of 15 parameters were calculated from each tumor. With VS-GR, 10/15 parameters significantly correlated with TRG and response groups. Of these, only AUCmax showed moderate correlation with TRG, 7 showed low correlation and 2 showed negligible correlation with TRG. 8 showed low correlation and 2 showed negligible correlation with response groups. With GRASP, 13/15 parameters significantly correlated with TRG and response groups. Of these, 10 showed low correlation and 3 showed negligible correlation with TRG. 11 showed low correlation and 2 showed negligible correlation with TRG. Seven parameters (AUC ＊ >0.70, P<0.05) showed good performance in response groups. Conclusions In patients with esophageal cancer on neoadjuvant chemotherapy, several parameters can differentiate responders from non-responders, using both GRASP and VS-GR techniques. GRASP may be able to better differentiate these two groups compared to VS-GR.

scholarly journals The value of GRASP on DCE-MRI for assessing response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with esophageal cancer

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanan Lu ◽  
Ling Ma ◽  
Jianjun QIN ◽  
Zhaoqi Wang ◽  
Jia Guo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Images ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Dce Mri ◽  
Low Correlation ◽  
Golden Angle ◽  
Response Groups ◽  
Response To Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Golden Angle Radial

Abstract Background To compare the value of two dynamic contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Images (DCE-MRI) reconstruction approaches, namely golden-angle radial sparse parallel (GRASP) and view-sharing with golden-angle radial profile (VS-GR) reconstruction, and evaluate their values in assessing response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) in patients with esophageal cancer (EC). Methods EC patients receiving nCT before surgery were enrolled prospectively. DCE-MRI scanning was performed after nCT and within 1 week before surgery. Tumor Regression Grade (TRG) was used for chemotherapy response evaluation, and patients were stratified into a responsive group (TRG1+2) and a non-responsive group (TRG3+4+5). Wilcoxon test was utilized for comparing GRASP and VS-GR reconstruction, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney test was performed for each parameter to assess response, and Spearman test was performed for analyzing correlation between parameters and TRGs, as well as responder and non-responder. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) was utilized for each significant parameter to assess its accuracy between responders and non-responders. Results Among the 64 patients included in this cohort (52 male, 12 female; average age of 59.1±7.9 years), 4 patients showed TRG1, 4 patients were TRG2, 7 patients were TRG3, 11 patients were TRG4, and 38 patients were TRG5. They were stratified into 8 responders and 56 non-responders. A total of 15 parameters were calculated from each tumor. With VS-GR, 10/15 parameters significantly correlated with TRG and response groups. Of these, only AUCmax showed moderate correlation with TRG, 7 showed low correlation and 2 showed negligible correlation with TRG. 8 showed low correlation and 2 showed negligible correlation with response groups. With GRASP, 13/15 parameters significantly correlated with TRG and response groups. Of these, 10 showed low correlation and 3 showed negligible correlation with TRG. 11 showed low correlation and 2 showed negligible correlation with TRG. Seven parameters (AUC ＊ >0.70, P<0.05) showed good performance in response groups. Conclusions In patients with esophageal cancer on neoadjuvant chemotherapy, several parameters can differentiate responders from non-responders, using both GRASP and VS-GR techniques. GRASP may be able to better differentiate these two groups compared to VS-GR.

scholarly journals XD-GRASP: Golden-angle radial MRI with reconstruction of extra motion-state dimensions using compressed sensing

2015 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 775-788 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Feng ◽  
Leon Axel ◽  
Hersh Chandarana ◽  
Kai Tobias Block ◽  
Daniel K. Sodickson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Compressed Sensing ◽  
Motion State ◽  
Golden Angle ◽  
Radial Mri ◽  
Golden Angle Radial
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document