목 적 : 기존 Single RF source에서는 환자의 해부학적 차이에 따른 영상신호의 불균형으로 인해 dielectric shading artifact가 발생하여 최근 이를 개선하고자 dual RF source를 사용하고 있다. 본 논문은 dual RF source 사용 시 필요한 B1 calibration scan의 호흡방법 변화에 따라 영상에 어떤 영향을 미치는지 알아보고자 한다.
대상 및 방법 : 복부질환이 없는 건강한 지원자 14명을 대상으로 검사장비는 Archieva 3.0T TX(philips medical system, Netherlands)를 사용하였고, 신호수집 코일은 32channel sense cardiac coil을 사용하였다. 검사방법은 호흡을 실제 검사와 동일한 expiration, 변형한 방법인 free breathing과 inspiration하는 방법으로 B1 calibraion scan을 각각 실시하여 호흡방법의 변화에 따라 B1 calibration scan 후 3D dual echo, e-THRIVE sequence/Axial 영상을 획득하였다. 평가방법은 정량적 방법으로 liver를 9개 구역으로 나누어 SNR과 CNR을 비교 측정하였고, 정성적 평가방법은 방사선사 3명이 영상의 homogeneity와 background noise 발생 정도를 3점 척도로 상대평가 하였다. 평가된 값은 Wilcoxon signed rank test(SPSS 18.0K for windows)로 통계처리 하였다.
결 과 : 정량적 평가는 expiration, Free breathing, inspiration 일 때 3D dual echo의 SNR은 251.05/167.07/183.53, e-THRIVE 161.08/117.22/128.38로 나타났고, CNR은 3D dual echo에서 73.68/56.4/55.69, e-THRIVE 62.61/40.34/35로 나타났다. 정성적 평가는 3D dual echo 2.30/1.76/1.94, e-THRIVE 2.56/1.46/1.98로 나타났다. 통계적 분석은 expiration 일 때 통계적으로 유의하였으나(p<0.05), free breathing과 inspiration 사이에서는 통계적으로 유의하지 않았다(p>0.05).
결 론 : 실제 검사와 동일한 호흡방법인 expiration으로 B1 calibration scan을 하였을 때 3D dual echo와 e-THRIVE에서 영상이 제일 우수한 것으로 나타났다. 다른 호흡방법으로 실시한 경우에는 SNR과 CNR이 저하되고 심할 경우 dielectric shading artifact가 발생하여 영상의 질을 감소시킴을 알 수 있었다. 따라서 복부 MRI 검사 시실제 검사방법과 동일한 호흡방법으로 얻은 B1 calibration scan이 보다 진단학적 가치가 높은 영상을 구현함을 확인 할 수 있었다.
Purpose : Single RF sources, dielectric shading artifacts occur from the image signal imbalance according to the anatomic differences among patients; therefore, dual RF sources are used to improve this. In this theses, we discuss how the image is affected by the changes in B1 calibration scan and breathing method needed when using dual RF sources.
Materials and Methods : The tests were performed on healty 14 volunteers, the test equipment used was Archieva 3.0T TX(philips medical system, Netherlands) and used coil was a 32-channel sense cardiac coil. The breath hold methods were expiration as in the actual examinations and the modified method of free breathing and inspiration. B1 calibration scans were performed on each method. According to the change in breathing method, the axial images were acquired by 3D dual echo and e-THRIVE sequence. The images were evaluated by a quantitative method of dividing the liver into 9 sections and comparing the measured SNR and CNR, and a qualitative method in which 3 radiologists carried out a relative evaluation of the images’ homogeneity and background noise occurrence according to a 3-point scale. The evaluation values were statistically processed using Wilcoxon signed rank test(SPSS 18.0K for windows).
Results : The quantitative results were as follows: the SNR values for 3D dual echo and e-THRIVE were 251.05/167.07/183.53 and 161.08/117.22/128.38, respectively expiration and free breathing and inspiration while the CNR values for 3D dual echo and the e-THRIVE were 73.68/56.4/55.69 and 62.61/40.34/35. The qualitative results for 3D dual echo and e-THRIVE were 2.30/1.76/1.94 and 2.56/1.46/1.98. The statistics results were expiration(p<0.05) but not statistically significant for free breathing and inspiration(p>0.05).
Conclusion : The B1 calibration scan results using the breathing method, after expiration which is identical to that used in real examinations, showed that the images were best. When B1 calibration scan was performed using a breathing method different, an imbalance in image homogeneity occurred resulting in deterioration of SNR and CNR and, in severe cases, dielectric shading artifacts occurred, thereby deteriorating the image quality. Therefore, we could confirm that the B1 calibration scan obtained by using a breathing method identical to that used act actual abdominal MRI examinations implemented the images with higher diagnostic value.