International Journal of Radiology Sciences

International Journal of Radiology Sciences


International Journal of Radiology Sciences
International Journal of Radiology Sciences
2019, Vol. 1, Issue 1
Comparison of carotid coils for cardiovascular imaging

Sonum Naidu, Michelle Campoli, Audrey Kaufman, Anoop Sahota, Renata Pyzik, Zahi Fayad, Venkatesh Mani

Background: Carotid atherosclerosis is known to cause thrombosis, embolization and stroke. Identifying high-risk patients requires imaging that allows for disambiguation of arterial plaque components. Development of coils that produce images with superior signal to noise ratios (SNR) is of use to the field. The purpose of this study is to compare the performance of the Machnet® and Medlion® 4-channel phased array carotid coils qualitatively and quantitatively. Methods: Ten volunteers underwent neck scans on a 3.0T Siemens Biograph mMR machine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. Each subject was scanned without using contrast or medication with the Machnet® and Medlion® coils. Images were analyzed by two analysts blinded to coil configuration. Signal intensities in the tissue and background were used to calculate the signal-to-noise and contrast-to-noise ratios of the images. Values were compared using paired t-tests. Both analysts qualitatively assigned the images a score of 1-5 (1 poor, 5 excellent) based on four criteria: overall image quality, vessel wall delineation, flow suppression, and artifacts. Scores were compared using a Kruskal Wallis test. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to determine the correlation between the quantitative and qualitative results. Results: Comparisons of SNR and CNR values from the two coils were not statistically significant for the vessel wall, lumen and muscle SNRs, and the lumen-wall CNR, (p=0.8961, 0.1674, 0.7018 and 0.4454, respectively). Correlation coefficients were significant (r > 0.67, p < 0.05) for only the Medlion® coil when correlating the vessel wall SNR to qualitative scores of Overall Quality, Wall Delineation and Flow Suppression (r= 0.764, r=0.714, r=0.909), CNR to Overall Quality and Flow Suppression (r=0.686, r=0.883) and lumen SNR to Overall Quality, Wall Delineation and Flow Suppression (r=0.814, r=0.696, r=0.676). The same trends were not seen as strongly for the Machnet® coil. Conclusion: The results suggest that imaging with the Medlion® coil provides images of comparable quality in terms of SNR, CNR and subjective analysis when compared with the Machnet® coil.
Pages : 01-05 | 581 Views | 262 Downloads