1994PubMedOpen access

Evaluation of shared-view acquisition using repeated echoes (SHARE): a dual-echo fast spin-echo MR technique.

Blake A. Johnson, Evan K. Fram, B P Drayer, Bruce L. Dean, Paul J. Keller, Ronald Jacobowitz

Open full text 12 citations

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical efficacy of a dual-echo fast spin-echo imaging technique, SHARE (share-view acquisition using repeated echoes), with conventional long-repetition-time spin-echo imaging. METHODS: Conventional spin-echo and SHARE fast spin-echo MR images of the brain were acquired in 50 randomized patients and interpreted separately in conjunction with the T1-weighted images. All images were reviewed independently by two neuroradiologists who were blinded to the clinical history and previous interpretations. RESULTS: The diagnoses rendered for the spin-echo and SHARE images were concordant in 48 of the 50 subjects (96%) by the first reader and in all 50 cases (100%) by the second reader. SHARE images were acquired in one-fourth of the imaging time yet image contrast, quality, and sensitivity to long T2 lesions were comparable. The SHARE technique was less sensitive to hemorrhagic residua. CONCLUSIONS: SHARE is a viable time-saving alternative to the conventional long-repetition-time pulse sequence. Although SHARE images are not as sensitive to magnetic susceptibility effects, the time saved using this technique could be used to perform a gradient-echo sequence when indicated.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical efficacy of a dual-echo fast spin-echo imaging technique, SHARE (share-view acquisition using repeated echoes), with conventional long-repetition-time spin-echo imaging. METHODS: Conventional spin-echo and SHARE fast spin-echo MR images of the brain were acquired in 50 randomized patients and interpreted separately in conjunction with the T1-weighted images. All images were reviewed independently by two neuroradiologists who were blinded to the clinical history and previous interpretations. RESULTS: The diagnoses rendered for the spin-echo and SHARE images were concordant in 48 of the 50 subjects (96%) by the first reader and in all 50 cases (100%) by the second reader. SHARE images were acquired in one-fourth of the imaging time yet image contrast, quality, and sensitivity to long T2 lesions were comparable. The SHARE technique was less sensitive to hemorrhagic residua. CONCLUSIONS: SHARE is a viable time-saving alternative to the conventional long-repetition-time pulse sequence. Although SHARE images are not as sensitive to magnetic susceptibility effects, the time saved using this technique could be used to perform a gradient-echo sequence when indicated.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 12 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical efficacy of a dual-echo fast spin-echo imaging technique, SHARE (share-view acquisition using repeated echoes), with conventional long-repetition-time spin-echo imaging. METHODS: Conventional spin-echo and SHARE fast spin-echo MR images of the brain were acquired in 50 randomized patients and interpreted separately in conjunction with the T1-weighted images. All images were reviewed independently by two neuroradiologists who were blinded to the clinical history and previous interpretations. RESULTS: The diagnoses rendered for the spin-echo and SHARE images were concordant in 48 of the 50 subjects (96%) by the first reader and in all 50 cases (100%) by the second reader. SHARE images were acquired in one-fourth of the imaging time yet image contrast, quality, and sensitivity to long T2 lesions were comparable. The SHARE technique was less sensitive to hemorrhagic residua. CONCLUSIONS: SHARE is a viable time-saving alternative to the conventional long-repetition-time pulse sequence. Although SHARE images are not as sensitive to magnetic susceptibility effects, the time saved using this technique could be used to perform a gradient-echo sequence when indicated.

Key concepts: Echo (communications protocol), Fast spin echo, Spin echo, Medicine, Echo time, Pulse sequence, Contrast (vision), Image quality

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Evaluation of shared-view acquisition using repeated echoes (SHARE): a dual-echo fast spin-echo MR technique. — Research Paper | ScholarLens