Key result
High-resolution 3T carotid MRI fails to improve scan-rescan reproducibility of plaque components over standard resolution.
Why the study?
Does high spatial resolution 3T carotid MRI improve plaque component measurement reproducibility compared to routinely used spatial resolution in patients with carotid atherosclerosis?
Observational (n=31)
Blinded and open-label image analysis
No
Does high spatial resolution 3T carotid MRI improve plaque component measurement reproducibility compared to routinely used spatial resolution in patients with carotid atherosclerosis?
Increasing the spatial resolution of 3T carotid MRI does not improve the reproducibility of plaque component measurements in patients with atherosclerotic carotid disease.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Standard resolution suffices for reproducible 3T carotid plaque assessment; leaves open whether other factors limit component quantification.
PURPOSE: Different in-plane resolutions have been used for carotid 3T MRI. We compared the reproducibility, as well as the within- and between reader variability of high and routinely used spatial resolution in scans of patients with atherosclerotic carotid artery disease. Since no consensus exists about the optimal segmentation method, we analysed all imaging data using two different segmentation methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 31 patient with carotid atherosclerosis a high (0.25 × 0.25 mm2; HR) and routinely used (0.50 × 0.50 mm2; LR) spatial resolution carotid MRI scan were performed within one month. A fully blinded closed and a simultaneously open segmentation were used to quantify the lipid rich necrotic core (LRNC), calcified and loose matrix (LM) plaque area and the fibrous cap (FC) thickness. RESULTS: No significant differences were observed between scan-rescan reproducibility for HR versus LR measurements, nor did we find any significant difference between the within-reader and between-reader reproducibility. The same applies for differences between the open and closed reads. All intraclass correlation coefficients between scans and rescans for the LRNC, calcified and LM plaque area, as well as the FC thickness measurements with the open segmentation method were excellent (all above 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the spatial resolution at the expense of the contrast-to-noise ratio does not improve carotid plaque component scan-rescan reproducibility in patients with atherosclerotic carotid disease, nor does using a different segmentation method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wijk et al. (2015) conducted an observational in Carotid atherosclerosis (n=31). High spatial resolution (0.25 x 0.25 mm2) 3T carotid MRI vs. Routinely used spatial resolution (0.50 x 0.50 mm2) 3T carotid MRI was evaluated on Scan-rescan reproducibility (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient) of lipid rich necrotic core (LRNC) area using open segmentation (p=0.67). Increasing the spatial resolution of 3T carotid MRI to 0.25 x 0.25 mm2 did not improve scan-rescan reproducibility of atherosclerotic plaque components compared to standard 0.50 x 0.50 mm2 resolution.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: