Assessment of image quality of cervical spine complications using Three Magnetic Resonance Imaging Sequences
Main Article Content
Abstract
Examining and comparing the image quality of degenerative cervical spine diseases through the application of three MRI sequences; the Two-Dimension T2 Weighed Turbo Spin Echo (2D T2W TSE), the Three-Dimension T2 Weighted Turbo Spin Echo (3D T2W TSE), and the T2 Turbo Field Echo (T2_TFE). Thirty-three patients who were diagnosed as having degenerative cervical spine diseases were involved in this study. Their age range was 40-60 years old. The images were produced via a 1.5 Tesla MRI device using (2D T2W TSE, 3D T2W TSE, and T2_TFE) sequences in the sagittal plane. The image quality was examined by objective and subjective assessments. The MRI image characteristics of the cervical spines (C4-C5, C5-C6, C6-C7) showed significant differences among the three sequences used P˂0.05 with the exception of the contrast P˃ 0.05. For the cervical spines (C4-C5), the minimum CNR was noticed with the T2_TFE sequence. For the cervical spines (C5-C6), the CNR and SNR were higher when they were assessed by the 2D T2W TSE sequence as compared to the other sequences. The same findings were observed with the cervical spines (C6-C7). The subjective assessment of the degenerative cervical spine diseases showed that the T2_TFE sequence is excellent in terms of viewing the central stenosis and foraminal stenosis. The best MRI diagnostic imaging can be obtained using the Turbo Field Echo (T2_TFE) and the Three-Dimension T2 Weighted Turbo Spin Echo (3D T2W TSE) sequences to gain detailed diagnostic information regarding the central stenosis and foraminal stenosis of the cervical spines (C4-C5, C5-C6, C6-C7)
Received 18/12/2022,
Revised 02/06/2023,
Accepted 04/06/2023,
Published 20/06/2023
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Raed MK, HussienAA. Estimation of Radiation Dose from Most Common Pediatrics Radiographic Examinations within Main Central Hospitals in Najaf City, Iraq. Baghdad Sci J. 2022; 19 (3): 654-659.https://doi.org/10.21123/bsj.2022.19.3.0654.
Bushra AS, Nur HZ,NorHH. A Comprehensive Review on Medical Image Steganography Based on LSBTechnique and Potential Challenges. Baghdad Sci J. 2021; 18(2) (Suppl. June): 957-974. https://doi.org/10.21123/bsj.2021.18.2(Suppl.).0957.
Abdullah A, Franky D, Nicole A, Aiman A, Katie M, Nyoman D. Comparison between 2D and 3D MEDIC for human cervical spinal cord MRI at 3T. J Med Radiat Sci. 2021; 68(1): 4-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.433 .
Garrett KH, Zakariah KS, Sadaf Y, Samartzi Philip KL, Dino S, Howard SA. Imaging in Spine Surgery: Current Concepts and Future Directions. Spine Surg Relat Res. 2019; 4(2): 99-110. https://doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2020-0011 .
Paola D, Michelangelo N, Alfredo T, Samantha C, Giuseppe G, Randy J . Magnetic Resonance Imaging in degenerative disease of the lumbar spine: Fat Saturation technique and contrast medium. Acta Biomed. 2018; 89(1 S): 208–9. https://doi.org/10.23750/abm.v89i1-S.7024.
Ji T, Jose VC, Abhirup D, Ashish DD. Degenerative cervical myelopathy: Insights into its pathobiology and molecular mechanism. J Clin Med. 2021; 10(6): 1214. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10061214 .
Peng B, Deplama MJ. Cervical disc degeneration and neck pain. J Pain Res. 2018; 11: 2853–2857. https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S180018
Lee MB, Jahng GH, Kim HJ, Kwon OI. High-frequency conductivity at Larmor-frequency in human brain using moving local window multilayer perceptron neural network. PLOS One. 2021; 16(5): e0251417. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251417.
Davies BM, Munro CF, Kotter MR. A novel insight into the challenges of diagnosing degenerative cervical myelopathy usingweb-based symptom Checkers. J Med Internet Res. 2019; 21(1): e10868. https://doi.org/10.2196/10868 .
He Z, Wang N, Kang L, Cui J, Wan Y. Analysis of pathological parameters of cervical spondylotic myelopathy using magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2020; 189: 105631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2019.105631 .
Martin AR, Tetreaul L, Nouri A, Curt A, Patrick Freund P, Movaghar VR, Wilson JR et al. Imaging and Electrophysiology for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy [AO Spine RECODE-DCM Research Priority Number 9]. Global Spine J. 2022; 12(1_suppl): 130S–146S.https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682211057484
Cedillo RC, Navarrete MT, Garcia JJ, Aguilar AN, Ternovoy SK, Valadez ER. Imaging Assessment of the Postoperative Spine: An Updated Pictorial Review of Selected Complications. Biomed Res Int. 2021; 9940001. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/9940001 .
He B, Sheldrick K, Das A, Diwan A. Clinical and Research MRI Techniques for Assessing Spinal Cord Integrity in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy-A Scoping Review. Biomedicines. 2022; 10 (10): 2621.https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10102621.
Zhao R, Song Y, Guo X, Yang X, Sun H, Chen X et al. Enhanced Information Flow From Cerebellum to Secondary Visual Cortices Leads to Better Surgery Outcome in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy Patients: A Stochastic Dynamic Causal Modeling Study With Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Front Hum Neurosci. 2021; 15: 632829. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2021.632829.
Li Z, Karis JP,Pipe JG. A 2D spiral turbo-spin-echo technique. Magn Reson Med. 2018; Nov 80 (5): 1989-1996. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.27171
Duran AH, Duran MN,Masood I, Maciolek LM, Hussain H. The Additional Diagnostic Value of the Three-dimensional Volume Rendering Imaging in Routine Radiology Practice. Cureus. 2019; 11(9): e5579. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.5579
Alvares RD, Szulc DA, Chenh HM. A scale to measure MRI contrast agent sensitivity. Sci Rep. 2017; 7(1): 15493. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-15732-8
Yu S, Dai G, Wang Z, Li L, Wei X, Xie Y. A consistency evaluation of signal-to-noise ratio in the quality assessment of human brain magnetic resonance images. BMC Med Imaging. 2018; 18(1): 17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-018-0256-6
Swainson CJ, Hutchinson CE, Watson Y. A comparison of 2-D and 3-D FSE imaging in MR of the cervical spine. Clin Radiol. 1997; 52(3): 194-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0009-9260(97)80272-3
Belavy DL, Brisby H, Douglas B, Hebelka H, Quittner MJ, Owen PJ et al. Characterization of Intervertebral Disc Changes in Asymptomatic Individuals with Distinct Physical Activity Histories Using Three Different Quantitative MRI Techniques. J Clin Med. 2020; 9(6): 1841.https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9061841
Kabasawa H. MR Imaging in the 21st Century: Technical Innovation over the First Two Decades. Magn Reson Med Sci. 2022; 21(1): 71-82. https://doi.org/10.2463/mrms.rev.2021-0011
Havsteen I, Ohlhues A, Madsen KH, Nybing JD, Christensen H, Christensen A. Are Movement Artifacts in Magnetic Resonance Imaging a Real Problem?-A Narrative Review. Front Neurol. 2017; 8: 232. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2017.00232
Hossein J, Fariborz F, Mehrnaz R, Babak R. Evaluation of diagnostic value and T2-weighted three-dimensional isotropic turbo spin-echo (3D-SPACE) image quality in comparison with T2-weighted two-dimensional turbo spin-echo (2D-TSE) sequences in lumbar spine MR imaging. Eur J Radiol Open. 2018; 6: 36-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejro.2018.12.003