Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in 3 Tesla: 2D MRCP versus 3D MRCP in Diagnostic Evaluation with Special Reference to Different Acquisition and Reconstruction Planes

Purpose: Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is an established technique for the evaluation of intra- and extrahepatic bile ducts in patients with known or suspected hepatobiliary disease. However, the ideal acquisition and reconstruction plane for optimal bile duct evaluation with 3D...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Vikram Patil, Nayana Shabadi, Sudha Das, SMC Shetty, Kamal Sen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: UMass Chan Medical School 2015-03-01
Series:Journal of Global Radiology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://escholarship.umassmed.edu/jgr/vol1/iss1/3
_version_ 1797969218784722944
author Vikram Patil
Nayana Shabadi
Sudha Das
Sudha Das
SMC Shetty
Kamal Sen
author_facet Vikram Patil
Nayana Shabadi
Sudha Das
Sudha Das
SMC Shetty
Kamal Sen
author_sort Vikram Patil
collection DOAJ
description Purpose: Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is an established technique for the evaluation of intra- and extrahepatic bile ducts in patients with known or suspected hepatobiliary disease. However, the ideal acquisition and reconstruction plane for optimal bile duct evaluation with 3D technique has not been evaluated.The purpose of our study was to compare different acquisition and reconstruction planes of 3D MRCP for bile duct assessment. Methods: 51 consecutive adult patients suspected to have pancreatico-biliary disease were examined with 3 Tesla (Philips 3 T Ingenia) system both a multi thin slice (3D) and a breath-hold (Single Shot) MRCP technique were performed. In the multi thin slice technique both source images and maximum intensity projections were examined. Two radiologists blinded to clinical information viewed both MRCP techniques independantly. Measure of correlation between each of the techniques and the inter observer agreement were computed. Coronal and axial MIP were reconstructed based on each dataset (resulting in two coronal and two axial MIP, respectively) and assessed the MIP, regarding visualization of bile ducts and image quality.Results were compared (Wilcoxon test). Intra- and interobserver variability were calculated (kappa-statistic). Results: In case of coronal data acquisition, visualization of bile duct segments was significantly better on coronal reconstructed MIP images as compared to axial reconstructed MIP (p < 0.05). Regarding visualization, coronal MIP of the coronal acquisition were equal to coronal MIP of the axial acquisition (p > 0.05). Image quality of coronal and axial datasets did not differ significantly. Obstruction due to tumor was shown in 30% of patients, and calculi in the common bile duct were shown also in 30% of patients employing the 3D MRCP technique. Obstruction due to tumor and calculi were shown in 30% and 21% of patients, respectively, using the SS 2D MRCP technique. Sensitivity and specificity in distinguishing calculi in the common bile duct by 3D MRCP and SS MRCP were 100%, 100%, 70% and 100% respectively. Conclusions: </strong>Although the 3D MRCP multislice technique is more time consuming than the SS MRCP breath-hold technique at a 3 Tesla (Philips 3 T Ingenia) system it is advisable to use thin slice 3D MRCP in order not to misdiagnose calculi in the common bile duct.The results of our study suggest that for visualization and evaluation of intra- and extrahepatic bile duct segments reconstructed images in coronal orientation are preferable.
first_indexed 2024-04-11T02:57:36Z
format Article
id doaj.art-ab3814f442b7492dbbe0f897d58d4b89
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2372-8418
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-11T02:57:36Z
publishDate 2015-03-01
publisher UMass Chan Medical School
record_format Article
series Journal of Global Radiology
spelling doaj.art-ab3814f442b7492dbbe0f897d58d4b892023-01-02T14:40:11ZengUMass Chan Medical SchoolJournal of Global Radiology2372-84182015-03-011110.7191/jgr.2015.1003Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in 3 Tesla: 2D MRCP versus 3D MRCP in Diagnostic Evaluation with Special Reference to Different Acquisition and Reconstruction PlanesVikram Patil0Nayana Shabadi1Sudha Das2Sudha Das3SMC Shetty4Kamal Sen5JSS Medical CollegeJSS Medical CollegeJSS Medical CollegeJSS Medical CollegeJSS Medical CollegeJSS Medical CollegePurpose: Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is an established technique for the evaluation of intra- and extrahepatic bile ducts in patients with known or suspected hepatobiliary disease. However, the ideal acquisition and reconstruction plane for optimal bile duct evaluation with 3D technique has not been evaluated.The purpose of our study was to compare different acquisition and reconstruction planes of 3D MRCP for bile duct assessment. Methods: 51 consecutive adult patients suspected to have pancreatico-biliary disease were examined with 3 Tesla (Philips 3 T Ingenia) system both a multi thin slice (3D) and a breath-hold (Single Shot) MRCP technique were performed. In the multi thin slice technique both source images and maximum intensity projections were examined. Two radiologists blinded to clinical information viewed both MRCP techniques independantly. Measure of correlation between each of the techniques and the inter observer agreement were computed. Coronal and axial MIP were reconstructed based on each dataset (resulting in two coronal and two axial MIP, respectively) and assessed the MIP, regarding visualization of bile ducts and image quality.Results were compared (Wilcoxon test). Intra- and interobserver variability were calculated (kappa-statistic). Results: In case of coronal data acquisition, visualization of bile duct segments was significantly better on coronal reconstructed MIP images as compared to axial reconstructed MIP (p < 0.05). Regarding visualization, coronal MIP of the coronal acquisition were equal to coronal MIP of the axial acquisition (p > 0.05). Image quality of coronal and axial datasets did not differ significantly. Obstruction due to tumor was shown in 30% of patients, and calculi in the common bile duct were shown also in 30% of patients employing the 3D MRCP technique. Obstruction due to tumor and calculi were shown in 30% and 21% of patients, respectively, using the SS 2D MRCP technique. Sensitivity and specificity in distinguishing calculi in the common bile duct by 3D MRCP and SS MRCP were 100%, 100%, 70% and 100% respectively. Conclusions: </strong>Although the 3D MRCP multislice technique is more time consuming than the SS MRCP breath-hold technique at a 3 Tesla (Philips 3 T Ingenia) system it is advisable to use thin slice 3D MRCP in order not to misdiagnose calculi in the common bile duct.The results of our study suggest that for visualization and evaluation of intra- and extrahepatic bile duct segments reconstructed images in coronal orientation are preferable.http://escholarship.umassmed.edu/jgr/vol1/iss1/3MRCP2D3DMagnetic resonance cholangiopancreatographyBile ductsCommon hepatic duct
spellingShingle Vikram Patil
Nayana Shabadi
Sudha Das
Sudha Das
SMC Shetty
Kamal Sen
Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in 3 Tesla: 2D MRCP versus 3D MRCP in Diagnostic Evaluation with Special Reference to Different Acquisition and Reconstruction Planes
Journal of Global Radiology
MRCP
2D
3D
Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography
Bile ducts
Common hepatic duct
title Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in 3 Tesla: 2D MRCP versus 3D MRCP in Diagnostic Evaluation with Special Reference to Different Acquisition and Reconstruction Planes
title_full Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in 3 Tesla: 2D MRCP versus 3D MRCP in Diagnostic Evaluation with Special Reference to Different Acquisition and Reconstruction Planes
title_fullStr Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in 3 Tesla: 2D MRCP versus 3D MRCP in Diagnostic Evaluation with Special Reference to Different Acquisition and Reconstruction Planes
title_full_unstemmed Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in 3 Tesla: 2D MRCP versus 3D MRCP in Diagnostic Evaluation with Special Reference to Different Acquisition and Reconstruction Planes
title_short Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in 3 Tesla: 2D MRCP versus 3D MRCP in Diagnostic Evaluation with Special Reference to Different Acquisition and Reconstruction Planes
title_sort magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in 3 tesla 2d mrcp versus 3d mrcp in diagnostic evaluation with special reference to different acquisition and reconstruction planes
topic MRCP
2D
3D
Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography
Bile ducts
Common hepatic duct
url http://escholarship.umassmed.edu/jgr/vol1/iss1/3
work_keys_str_mv AT vikrampatil magneticresonancecholangiopancreatographyin3tesla2dmrcpversus3dmrcpindiagnosticevaluationwithspecialreferencetodifferentacquisitionandreconstructionplanes
AT nayanashabadi magneticresonancecholangiopancreatographyin3tesla2dmrcpversus3dmrcpindiagnosticevaluationwithspecialreferencetodifferentacquisitionandreconstructionplanes
AT sudhadas magneticresonancecholangiopancreatographyin3tesla2dmrcpversus3dmrcpindiagnosticevaluationwithspecialreferencetodifferentacquisitionandreconstructionplanes
AT sudhadas magneticresonancecholangiopancreatographyin3tesla2dmrcpversus3dmrcpindiagnosticevaluationwithspecialreferencetodifferentacquisitionandreconstructionplanes
AT smcshetty magneticresonancecholangiopancreatographyin3tesla2dmrcpversus3dmrcpindiagnosticevaluationwithspecialreferencetodifferentacquisitionandreconstructionplanes
AT kamalsen magneticresonancecholangiopancreatographyin3tesla2dmrcpversus3dmrcpindiagnosticevaluationwithspecialreferencetodifferentacquisitionandreconstructionplanes