Log in

Hepatic pseudo-anisotropy: a specific artifact in hepatic diffusion-weighted images obtained with respiratory triggering

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose:

Hepatic pseudo-anisotropy is an artifact observed in hepatic diffusion-weighted imaging under respiratory triggering (RT-DWI). To determine the clinical significance of this phenomenon, hepatic RT-DW images were reviewed.

Methods:

One hundred and five MR examinations, including RT-DWI, were assessed. The patient group included 62 non-cirrhotic and 43 cirrhotic individuals. All images were evaluated by mutual agreement of two radiologists from the viewpoints of incidence of pseudo-anisotropy and correlation between pseudo-anisotropy and the quality of trace images. The ADC of normal hepatic parenchyma of non-cirrhotic livers were measured in both areas with and without pseudo-anisotropy.

Results:

Pseudo-anisotropy was observed in 60% of non-cirrhotic (37/62) and 30% of cirrhotic (13/43) images. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P  <  0.001). The quality of trace images showed a tendency to worsen as pseudo-anisotropy became significant. However, the quality of trace images was generally satisfactory, with only two patients whose trace images were difficult to interpret due to pseudo-anisotropy. The areas with pseudo-anisotropy showed higher ADC than those without pseudo-anisotropy (P  <  0.001).

Conclusion:

Pseudo-anisotropy is a type of artifact that originates from respiratory movement. Even though respiratory triggering is employed, ADC measurement of the liver is inaccurate because of pseudo-anisotropy, especially in non-cirrhotic patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rovira A, Rovira-Gols A, Pedraza S, Grive E, Molina C and Alvarez-Sobin J (2002). Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the acute phase of transient ischemic attacks. AJNR 23: 77–83

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Basser PJ, Pajevic S, Pierpaoli C, Duda J and Aldroubi A (2000). In vivo fiber tractgraphy using DT–MRI data. Magn Reson Med 44: 625–632

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sugahara T, Korogi Y, Kochi M, Ikushima I, Shigematu Y, Hirai T, Okuda T, Liang L, Ge Y, Komahara Y, Ushio Y and Takahashi M (1999). Usefulness of diffusion-weighted MRI with echo-planar technique in the evaluation of cellularity in gliomas. JMRI 9: 53–60

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Pruessmann KP, Weiger M, Scheidegger MB and Boesiger P (1999). SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fast MRI. Magn Reson Med 42: 952–962

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bammer R, Keeling SL, Augustin M, Pruessmann KP, Wolf R, Stollberger R, Hartung HP and Fazekas F (2001). Improved diffusion-weighed single-shot echo-planar imaging (EPI) in stroke using sensitivity encoding (SENSE). Magn Reson Med 46: 548–554

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nasu K, Kuroki Y, Kuroki S, Murakami K, Nawano S and Moriyama N (2004). Diffusion-weighted single shot echo planar imaging of colorectal cancer using a sensitivity-encoding technique. JJCO 34: 620–626

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kuroki Y, Nasu K, Kuroki K, Murakami K, Hayashi T, Sekiguchi R and Nawano S (2004). Diffusion weighted imaging of breast cancer with the apparent diffusion coefficient value. Magn Reson Med Sci 3: 79–85

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nasu K, Kuroki Y, Nawano S, Kuroki S, Tsukamoto T, Yamamoto S, Motoori K and Ueda T (2006). Hepatic metastases: diffusion-weighted sensitivity-encoding versus spio-enhanced mr imaging. Radiology 239: 122–130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Stejskal EO and Tanner JE (1965). Spin echoes in the presence of a time-dependent field gradient. J Chem Phys 42: 288–292

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Nasu K, Kuroki Y, Sekiguchi R and Nawano S (2006). The effect of simultaneous use of respiratory triggering in diffusion weighted imaging of the liver. MRMS 5: 129–136

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Murz P, Flacke S, Traber F, van den Brink JS, Gieseke J and Schild HH (2002). Abdomen: diffusion-weighted MR imaging with pulse-triggered single-shot sequence. Radiology 224: 258–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Nasu K, Kuroki Y, Sekiguchi R, Kazama T and Nakajima H (2006). Measurement of the apparent diffusion coefficient in the liver: is it a reliable index for hepatic disease diagnosis. Radiat Med 24: 438–444

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. **ng D, Papadekin NG, Haung CLH, Lee VM, Carpenter TA and Hall LD (1997). Optimized diffusion-weighting for measurement of apparent diffusion coefficient in human brain. Magn Reson Imaging 15: 771–784

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wang J, Takayama F, Kawakami S, Saito A, Matsushita T, Momose M and Ishiyama T (2001). Head and neck lesions: characterization with diffusion-weighted echo-planar MR imaging. Radiology 220: 621–630

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Guo AC, Dash RC and Provenzale JM (2002). Lymphomas and high-grade astrocytomas: comparison of water diffusibility and histologic characteristics. Radiology 224: 177–183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Beneviste H, Hedlund L and Jonson G (1992). Mechanism of detection of acute cerebral ischemia in rats by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance microscopy. Stroke 23: 746–754

    Google Scholar 

  17. Takahara T, Imai Y, Yamashita T, Yasuda S, Nasu S and van Cauteren M (2004). Diffusion weighted whole body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS): technical improvement using free breathing, STIR and high resolution 3D display. Radiat Med 22: 275–282

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Le Bihan D, Poupon C, Amadon A and Lethimonnier F (2006). Artifacts and pitfalls in diffusion DWI. JMRI 24: 467–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bernstein MA, King KF, Zhou XJ (2004) Handbook of pulse sequence. Advanced pulse sequence technique, Chap 17. Elsevier, SanDiego, pp 802–896

  20. Rohlifing T, Maurer CR Jr, O’Dell WG and Zhong J (2004). Modeling liver motion and deformation during the respiratory cycle using intensity-based nonrigid registration of gated MR images. Med Phys 31: 427–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Dienes JK (1979). On the analysis of rotation and stress rate in deforming bodies. Acta Mech 32: 217–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Bentrem DJ, Dematteo RP and Blumgart LH (2005). Surgical therapy for metastatic disease to the liver. Annu Rev Med 56: 139–156

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katsuhiro Nasu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nasu, K., Kuroki, Y., Fujii, H. et al. Hepatic pseudo-anisotropy: a specific artifact in hepatic diffusion-weighted images obtained with respiratory triggering. Magn Reson Mater Phy 20, 205–211 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-007-0084-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-007-0084-0

Keywords

Navigation