The usefulness of the three-dimensional enhanced T1 high-resolution isotropic volume excitation MR in the evaluation of shoulder pathology: comparison with two-dimensional enhanced T1 fat saturation MR

• Published in: British journal of radiology 2015-10, Vol.88 (1054), p.20140830-20140830
• Main Authors: Park, Hee J, Lee, So Y, Rho, Myung H, Kwon, Heon J, Kim, Mi S, Chung, Eun C
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Female; Humans; Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods; Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods; Male; Middle Aged; Reproducibility of Results; Retrospective Studies; Rotator Cuff; Sensitivity and Specificity; Shoulder Joint - injuries; Shoulder Joint - pathology; Young Adult
• ISSN: 0007-1285; 1748-880X
• DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20140830

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of three-dimensional (3D) enhanced T1 high-resolution isotropic volume excitation (eTHRIVE) shoulder MR for variable shoulder pathology such as rotator cuff tear, labral injury and synovial pathology in comparison with two-dimensional enhanced fast spin echo T1 fat saturation (2D T1 FS) sequences MR. This retrospective study included 86 patients who underwent MRI of the shoulder using eTHRIVE technique. Two radiologists evaluated anatomic identification of the supraspinatus, glenoid labrum and acromioclavicular joint (AC joint) on routine MRI sequences (2D T1 FS) and compared them with the reformatted eTHRIVE images. Subjective scoring of the images was performed with a four-point scale that rated the degree of discrimination of the shape of the supraspinatus, glenoid labrum and AC joint. The diagnostic accuracy of eTHRIVE compared with routine MR images was evaluated in terms of rotator cuff pathology, labral pathology and synovial pathology. Anatomic identification scores of the supraspinatus tendon and labrum were significantly lower for eTHRIVE than for 2D T1 FS. There were no significant differences between eTHRIVE and 2D T1 FS in anatomic identification of the AC joint. There were no significant differences between eTHRIVE and 2D T1 FS in diagnosing the three disease categories. eTHRIVE had comparable diagnostic accuracy to 2D T1 FS imaging in the evaluation of rotator cuff tears, labral injury and synovial pathology, but anatomic identification was inferior to that of 2D T1 FS. The accuracy of 3D eTHRIVE imaging is comparable to that of 2D T1 FS for the diagnosis of rotator cuff tears, labral injury and synovial pathology.