Comparison of Compressed Sensing Diffusion Spectrum Imaging and Diffusion Tensor Imaging in Patients with Intracranial Masses

• Published in: Magnetic resonance imaging Vol. 36; pp. 24 - 31
• Main Authors: Young, Robert J, Tan, Ek T, Peck, Kyung K, Jenabi, Mehrnaz, Karimi, Sasan, Brennan, Nicole, Rubel, Jennifer, Lyo, John, Shi, Weiji, Zhang, Zhigang, Prastawa, Marcel, Liu, Xiaofeng, Sperl, Jonathan I, Fatovic, Robin, Marinelli, Luca, Holodny, Andrei I
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Netherlands Elsevier Inc 01.02.2017
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Brain - diagnostic imaging; Brain Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Compressed-sensing; Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods; Diffusion spectrum; Diffusion tensor; Diffusion Tensor Imaging - methods; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Radiology; Retrospective Studies; compressed-sensing; diffusion tensor imaging; diffusion spectrum imaging; Compressed-sensing; Diffusion tensor; Diffusion spectrum
• ISSN: 0730-725X; 1873-5894
• DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2016.10.001

Abstract Purpose To compare compressed diffusion spectrum imaging (CS-DSI) with diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) in patients with intracranial masses. We hypothesized that CS-DSI would provide superior visualization of the motor and language tracts. Materials and Methods We retrospectively analyzed 25 consecutive patients with intracranial masses who underwent DTI and CS-DSI for preoperative planning. Directionally-encoded anisotropy maps, and streamline hand corticospinal motor tracts and arcuate fasciculus language tracts were graded according to a 3-point scale. Tract counts, anisotropy, and lengths were also calculated. Comparisons were made using exact marginal homogeneity, McNemar's and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Results Readers preferred the CS-DSI over DTI anisotropy maps in 92% of the cases, and the CS-DSI over DTI tracts in 84%. The motor tracts were graded as excellent in 80% of cases for CS-DSI versus 52% for DTI; 58% of the motor tracts graded as acceptable in DTI were graded as excellent in CS-DSI (p = 0.02). The language tracts were graded as excellent in 68% for CS-DSI versus none for DTI; 78% of the language tracts graded as acceptable by DTI were graded as excellent by CS-DSI (p < 0.001). CS-DSI demonstrated smaller normalized mean differences than DTI for motor tract counts, anisotropy and language tract counts (p ≤ 0.01). Conclusion CS-DSI was preferred over DTI for the evaluation of motor and language white matter tracts in patients with intracranial masses. Results suggest that CS-DSI may be more useful than DTI for preoperative planning purposes.