A comparison of MR imaging with fast-FLAIR, HASTE-FLAIR, and EPI-FLAIR sequences in the assessment of patients with multiple sclerosis

Massimo Filippi, Maria A. Rocca, Martin Wiessmann, Silvia Mennea, Mara Cercignani, Tarek A. Yousry, Maria P. Sormani, Giancarlo Comi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Fast fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery (FLAIR)sequences are sensitive for detecting lesions in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). More rapid fast-FLAIR imaging of the brain can be achieved by the concomitant use of half-Fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin-echo (HASTE-FLAIR) and echo-planar imaging (EPI-FLAIR). The present study was performed in a large cohort of subjects to assess and compare the number and volume of brain lesions detected by the fast-FLAIR, HASTE-FLAIR, and EPI-FLAIR sequences in patients with MS. METHODS: Fast. FLAIR, HASTE- FLAIR, and EPI-FLAIR sequences were obtained from 46 consecutive MS patients. Lesions seen on each type of sequence were counted and classified by consensus by two observers. Lesion volumes were measured using a semiautomated segmentation technique based on local thresholding. RESULTS: The quality of the fast-FLAIR images was significantly better than that of HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-F LAIR images. Fast-FLAIR revealed significantly more lesions and higher lesion volumes than did HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR. A similar number of large lesions was detected by the three sequences, but HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR showed significantly fewer small and intermediate lesions than did fast-FLAIR. The number of lesions seen on HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR images was similar. CONCLUSION: HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR sequences revealed as many large MS lesions as fast-FLAIR. Because their acquisition times are only a fraction of that needed for fast-FLAIR sequences, they may be useful for making a rapid diagnosis of MS in uncooperative patients. Their reduced ability to detect smaller lesions indicates that they should not be used as a routine approach to imaging patients with MS.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1931-1938
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology
Volume20
Issue number10
Publication statusPublished - 1999

Fingerprint

Sequence Inversion
Multiple Sclerosis
Echo-Planar Imaging
Neuroimaging
Brain

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

A comparison of MR imaging with fast-FLAIR, HASTE-FLAIR, and EPI-FLAIR sequences in the assessment of patients with multiple sclerosis. / Filippi, Massimo; Rocca, Maria A.; Wiessmann, Martin; Mennea, Silvia; Cercignani, Mara; Yousry, Tarek A.; Sormani, Maria P.; Comi, Giancarlo.

In: American Journal of Neuroradiology, Vol. 20, No. 10, 1999, p. 1931-1938.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{569b886546a54f46bcad11eae5ee8056,
title = "A comparison of MR imaging with fast-FLAIR, HASTE-FLAIR, and EPI-FLAIR sequences in the assessment of patients with multiple sclerosis",
abstract = "BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Fast fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery (FLAIR)sequences are sensitive for detecting lesions in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). More rapid fast-FLAIR imaging of the brain can be achieved by the concomitant use of half-Fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin-echo (HASTE-FLAIR) and echo-planar imaging (EPI-FLAIR). The present study was performed in a large cohort of subjects to assess and compare the number and volume of brain lesions detected by the fast-FLAIR, HASTE-FLAIR, and EPI-FLAIR sequences in patients with MS. METHODS: Fast. FLAIR, HASTE- FLAIR, and EPI-FLAIR sequences were obtained from 46 consecutive MS patients. Lesions seen on each type of sequence were counted and classified by consensus by two observers. Lesion volumes were measured using a semiautomated segmentation technique based on local thresholding. RESULTS: The quality of the fast-FLAIR images was significantly better than that of HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-F LAIR images. Fast-FLAIR revealed significantly more lesions and higher lesion volumes than did HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR. A similar number of large lesions was detected by the three sequences, but HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR showed significantly fewer small and intermediate lesions than did fast-FLAIR. The number of lesions seen on HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR images was similar. CONCLUSION: HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR sequences revealed as many large MS lesions as fast-FLAIR. Because their acquisition times are only a fraction of that needed for fast-FLAIR sequences, they may be useful for making a rapid diagnosis of MS in uncooperative patients. Their reduced ability to detect smaller lesions indicates that they should not be used as a routine approach to imaging patients with MS.",
author = "Massimo Filippi and Rocca, {Maria A.} and Martin Wiessmann and Silvia Mennea and Mara Cercignani and Yousry, {Tarek A.} and Sormani, {Maria P.} and Giancarlo Comi",
year = "1999",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "1931--1938",
journal = "American Journal of Neuroradiology",
issn = "0195-6108",
publisher = "American Society of Neuroradiology",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of MR imaging with fast-FLAIR, HASTE-FLAIR, and EPI-FLAIR sequences in the assessment of patients with multiple sclerosis

AU - Filippi, Massimo

AU - Rocca, Maria A.

AU - Wiessmann, Martin

AU - Mennea, Silvia

AU - Cercignani, Mara

AU - Yousry, Tarek A.

AU - Sormani, Maria P.

AU - Comi, Giancarlo

PY - 1999

Y1 - 1999

N2 - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Fast fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery (FLAIR)sequences are sensitive for detecting lesions in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). More rapid fast-FLAIR imaging of the brain can be achieved by the concomitant use of half-Fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin-echo (HASTE-FLAIR) and echo-planar imaging (EPI-FLAIR). The present study was performed in a large cohort of subjects to assess and compare the number and volume of brain lesions detected by the fast-FLAIR, HASTE-FLAIR, and EPI-FLAIR sequences in patients with MS. METHODS: Fast. FLAIR, HASTE- FLAIR, and EPI-FLAIR sequences were obtained from 46 consecutive MS patients. Lesions seen on each type of sequence were counted and classified by consensus by two observers. Lesion volumes were measured using a semiautomated segmentation technique based on local thresholding. RESULTS: The quality of the fast-FLAIR images was significantly better than that of HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-F LAIR images. Fast-FLAIR revealed significantly more lesions and higher lesion volumes than did HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR. A similar number of large lesions was detected by the three sequences, but HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR showed significantly fewer small and intermediate lesions than did fast-FLAIR. The number of lesions seen on HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR images was similar. CONCLUSION: HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR sequences revealed as many large MS lesions as fast-FLAIR. Because their acquisition times are only a fraction of that needed for fast-FLAIR sequences, they may be useful for making a rapid diagnosis of MS in uncooperative patients. Their reduced ability to detect smaller lesions indicates that they should not be used as a routine approach to imaging patients with MS.

AB - BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Fast fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery (FLAIR)sequences are sensitive for detecting lesions in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). More rapid fast-FLAIR imaging of the brain can be achieved by the concomitant use of half-Fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin-echo (HASTE-FLAIR) and echo-planar imaging (EPI-FLAIR). The present study was performed in a large cohort of subjects to assess and compare the number and volume of brain lesions detected by the fast-FLAIR, HASTE-FLAIR, and EPI-FLAIR sequences in patients with MS. METHODS: Fast. FLAIR, HASTE- FLAIR, and EPI-FLAIR sequences were obtained from 46 consecutive MS patients. Lesions seen on each type of sequence were counted and classified by consensus by two observers. Lesion volumes were measured using a semiautomated segmentation technique based on local thresholding. RESULTS: The quality of the fast-FLAIR images was significantly better than that of HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-F LAIR images. Fast-FLAIR revealed significantly more lesions and higher lesion volumes than did HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR. A similar number of large lesions was detected by the three sequences, but HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR showed significantly fewer small and intermediate lesions than did fast-FLAIR. The number of lesions seen on HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR images was similar. CONCLUSION: HASTE-FLAIR and EPI-FLAIR sequences revealed as many large MS lesions as fast-FLAIR. Because their acquisition times are only a fraction of that needed for fast-FLAIR sequences, they may be useful for making a rapid diagnosis of MS in uncooperative patients. Their reduced ability to detect smaller lesions indicates that they should not be used as a routine approach to imaging patients with MS.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032692446&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032692446&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 10588121

AN - SCOPUS:0032692446

VL - 20

SP - 1931

EP - 1938

JO - American Journal of Neuroradiology

JF - American Journal of Neuroradiology

SN - 0195-6108

IS - 10

ER -