Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Feasibility of Using Short Repetition Time for Brain Tumors in 23Na-MRI.

Created on 09 Sep 2026

Authors

Koji Yamashita, Makoto Obara, Kazufumi Kikuchi, Daisuke Kuga, Daichi Momosaka, Masaoki Kusunoki, Tatsuhiro Wada, Chiaki Tokunaga, Ryusuke Hatae, Yutaka Fujioka, Ryosuke Otsuji, Yasutomo Katsumata, Marc Van Cauteren, Koji Yoshimoto, Kousei Ishigami

Published in

Academic radiology. Sep 08, 2026. Epub Sep 08, 2026.

Abstract

23Na‑MR imaging requires lengthy acquisition times, it remains difficult to implement routinely in clinical workflows and limits broader clinical application. This study aimed to determine whether a TR of 60 ms (TR60) could maintain brain tumor conspicuity while reducing acquisition time compared to TR100.
This prospective study includes adult patients with histopathologically confirmed supratentorial brain tumors. A 3 T scanner with a dual-tuned 1H/23Na birdcage head coil was used. A 3D radial stack-of-stars sequence was employed for the acquisition of 23Na-MR images. The lesion conspicuity on 23Na-MR images was evaluated using the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and CNR efficiency (CNR/√ acquisition time; time-CNR), calculated by comparing the signal intensity of the tumor with that of the background. The CNR and time-CNR were then compared between TR60 and TR100 in detecting brain tumors.
A total of 30 patients (22 men) were enrolled. No significant differences were observed in the CNR between TR60 and TR100 (p = 0.56). The time-CNR of TR60 was significantly higher than that of TR100 (p < 0.001).
23Na-MR imaging using TR60 achieved a significantly higher time-CNR than TR100 while maintaining comparable CNR, indicating improved acquisition efficiency for brain tumor evaluation.

PMID:
42711182
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 09 Sep 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 9
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement