- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Pooley, Robert A."
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Detection of different kidney stone types: an ex vivo comparison of ultrashort echo time MRI to reference standard CT(Elsevier, 2016-01) Ibrahim, El-Sayed H.; Cernigliaro, Joseph G.; Pooley, Robert A.; Bridges, Mellena D.; Giesbrandt, Jamie G.; Williams, James C.; Haley, William E.; Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, School of MedicineBACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: With the development of ultrashort echo time (UTE) sequences, it may now be possible to detect kidney stones by using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In this study, kidney stones of varying composition and sizes were imaged using both UTE MRI as well as the reference standard of computed tomography (CT), with different surrounding materials and scan setups. METHODS: One hundred and fourteen kidney stones were inserted into agarose and urine phantoms and imaged both on a dual-energy CT (DECT) scanner using a standard renal stone imaging protocol and on an MRI scanner using the UTE sequence with both head and body surface coils. A subset of the stones representing all composition types and sizes was then inserted into the collecting system of porcine kidneys and imaged in vitro with both CT and MRI. RESULTS: All of the stones were visible on both CT and MRI imaging. DECT was capable of differentiating between uric acid and nonuric acid stones. In MRI imaging, the choice of coil and large field of view (FOV) did not affect stone detection or image quality. The MRI images showed good visualization of the stones' shapes, and the stones' dimensions measured from MRI were in good agreement with the actual values (R(2)=0.886, 0.895, and 0.81 in the agarose phantom, urine phantom, and pig kidneys, respectively). The measured T2 relaxation times ranged from 4.2 to 7.5ms, but did not show significant differences among different stone composition types. CONCLUSIONS: UTE MRI compared favorably with the reference standard CT for imaging stones of different composition types and sizes using body surface coil and large FOV, which suggests potential usefulness of UTE MRI in imaging kidney stones in vivo.Item Motion artifacts in kidney stone imaging using single-source and dual-source dual-energy CT scanners: a phantom study(Springer, 2015-10) Ibrahim, El-Sayed H.; Cernigliaro, Joseph G.; Pooley, Robert A.; Williams, James C.; Haley, William E.; Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, School of MedicinePURPOSE: Dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) has shown the capability of differentiating uric acid (UA) from non-UA stones with 90-100% accuracy. With the invention of dual-source (DS) scanners, both low- and high-energy images are acquired simultaneously. However, DECT can also be performed by sequential acquisition of both images on single-source (SS) scanners. The objective of this study is to investigate the effects of motion artifacts on stone classification using both SS-DECT and DS-DECT. METHODS: 114 kidney stones of different types and sizes were imaged on both DS-DECT and SS-DECT scanners with tube voltages of 80 and 140 kVp with and without induced motion. Postprocessing was conducted to create material-specific images from corresponding low- and high-energy images. The dual-energy ratio (DER) and stone material were determined and compared among different scans. RESULTS: For the motionless scans, all stones were correctly classified with SS-DECT, while two cystine stones were misclassified with DS-DECT. When motion was induced, 94% of the stones were misclassified with SS-DECT versus 11% with DS-DECT (P < 0.0001). Stone size was not a factor in stone misclassification under motion. Stone type was not a factor in stone misclassification under motion with SS-DECT, although with DS-DECT, cystine showed higher number of stone misclassification. CONCLUSIONS: Motion artifacts could result in stone misclassification in DECT. This effect is more pronounced in SS-DECT versus DS-DECT, especially if stones of different types lie in close proximity to each other. Further, possible misinterpretation of the number of stones (i.e., missing one, or thinking that there are two) in DS-DECT could be a potentially significant problem.