Skip to main content
European Radiology Experimental
Download PDF
  • Original article
  • Open access
  • Published:

Thin-slice reverse encoding distortion correction DWI facilitates visualization of non-functioning pituitary neuroendocrine tumor (PitNET)/pituitary adenoma and surrounding normal structures

European Radiology Experimental volume 8, Article number: 28 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

To evaluate the clinical usefulness of thin-slice echo-planar imaging (EPI)-based diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with an on-console distortion correction technique, termed reverse encoding distortion correction DWI (RDC-DWI), in patients with non-functioning pituitary neuroendocrine tumor (PitNET)/pituitary adenoma.

Methods

Patients with non-functioning PitNET/pituitary adenoma who underwent 3-T RDC-DWI between December 2021 and September 2022 were retrospectively enrolled. Image quality was compared among RDC-DWI, DWI with correction for distortion induced by B0 inhomogeneity alone (B0-corrected-DWI), and original EPI-based DWI with anterior-posterior phase-encoding direction (AP-DWI). Susceptibility artifact, anatomical visualization of cranial nerves, overall tumor visualization, and visualization of cavernous sinus invasion were assessed qualitatively. Quantitative assessment of geometric distortion was performed by evaluation of anterior and posterior displacement between each DWI and the corresponding three-dimensional T2-weighted imaging. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and apparent diffusion coefficient values were measured.

Results

Sixty-four patients (age 70.8 ± 9.9 years [mean ± standard deviation]; 33 females) with non-functioning PitNET/pituitary adenoma were evaluated. In terms of susceptibility artifacts in the frontal and temporal lobes, visualization of left trigeminal nerve, overall tumor visualization, and anterior displacement, RDC-DWI performed the best and B0-corrected-DWI performed better than AP-DWI. The right oculomotor and right trigeminal nerves were better visualized by RDC-DWI than by B0-corrected-DWI and AP-DWI. Visualization of cavernous sinus invasion and posterior displacement were better by RDC-DWI and B0-corrected-DWI than by AP-DWI. SNR and CNR were the highest for RDC-DWI.

Conclusions

RDC-DWI achieved excellent image quality regarding susceptibility artifact, geometric distortion, and tumor visualization in patients with non-functioning PitNET/pituitary adenoma.

Relevance statement

RDC-DWI facilitates excellent visualization of the pituitary region and surrounding normal structures, and its on-console distortion correction technique is convenient. RDC-DWI can clearly depict cavernous sinus invasion of PitNET/pituitary adenoma even without contrast medium.

Key points

• RDC-DWI is an EPI-based DWI technique with a novel on-console distortion correction technique.

• RDC-DWI corrects distortion due to B0 field inhomogeneity and eddy current.

• We evaluated the usefulness of thin-slice RDC-DWI in non-functioning PitNET/pituitary adenoma.

• RDC-DWI exhibited excellent visualization in the pituitary region and surrounding structures.

• In addition, the on-console distortion correction of RDC-DWI is clinically convenient.

Graphical Abstract

Background

Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is clinically useful for the evaluation of brain tumors [1]. In non-functioning pituitary neuroendocrine tumor (PitNET)/pituitary adenoma, DWI is valuable for assessing tumor consistency [2], prediction of Ki-67 expression [3], prediction of surgical outcome [4], and early detection of recurrence [5]. Echo-planar imaging-based DWI (EPI-DWI) is the most widely used DWI technique but is prone to geometric distortion along the phase-encoding direction due to B0 field inhomogeneity, especially in the pituitary region [6]. To overcome image degradation due to distortion in the pituitary region, various DWI techniques, including single-shot fast spin-echo DWI [7], line-scan DWI [8], periodically rotated overlapping parallel lines with enhanced reconstruction (PROPELLER)/BLADE DWI [9, 10], reduced-field of view DWI [11], turbo-spin-echo (TSE) DWI [12, 13], and readout-segmented EPI-DWI [14, 15], have been developed. Nevertheless, the long acquisition time and low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of these techniques prevent their clinical application [10, 12, 16].

A popular strategy for correction of geometric distortion in EPI-DWI involves acquiring pairs of images with reverse phase-encoding directions, known as “blip-up blip-down” acquisition, to generate an undistorted image. This off-console technique, available as the “topup” tool in FMRIB Software Library−FSL (https://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/topup), can significantly improve extensive geometric distortion due to B0 field inhomogeneity using the b = 0 s/mm2 images with reverse phase-encoding directions [17, 18]. An off-console correction for distortion induced by eddy currents has also been reported [19]. However, off-console techniques such as these require external post-processing and are therefore complicated to use in clinical practice.

Distortion correction techniques for EPI-based DWI have recently been implemented in clinical MRI scanners [20]. A software package termed reverse encoding distortion correction DWI (RDC-DWI) has been developed [21, 22], which is a novel on-console correction technique for distortion due to B0 inhomogeneity and distortion induced by eddy currents. An on-console distortion correction technique of RDC-DWI is more convenient and clinically feasible compared with existing off-console distortion correction tools [17,18,19,20].

To the best of our knowledge, no previous study has evaluated the pituitary region on DWI employing an on-console distortion correction technique that uses pairs of images with reverse phase-encoding directions, such as RDC-DWI. This study aims to emphasize the clinical usefulness of thin-slice RDC-DWI by evaluating distortion, susceptibility artifact, and visualization of tumor and surrounding normal structures in patients with non-functioning PitNET/pituitary adenoma, in comparison with DWI with correction for distortion induced by B0 field inhomogeneity alone (B0-corrected-DWI) and original EPI-based DWI with anterior-posterior phase-encoding direction (AP-DWI).

Methods

Patient study

To investigate clinical usefulness of thin-slice RDC-DWI in the pituitary region, patients with non-functioning PitNET/pituitary adenoma were selected because non-functioning PitNET/pituitary adenoma is the most common pituitary tumor. Our institutional review board approved this retrospective study. Informed consent was waived due to its retrospective nature. A flowchart of the study design and patient inclusions is shown in Fig. 1. Eighty-nine consecutive patients (mean age, 68.1 ± 11.4 years [mean ± standard deviation]; 44 females) with non-functioning PitNET/pituitary adenoma who underwent MR imaging, including RDC-DWI with slice thickness of 1.2 mm and three-dimensional T2-weighted imaging (3D-T2WI), between December 2021 and September 2022 were included. Patients were excluded if they met the following exclusion criteria: (a) PitNET/pituitary adenoma with hemorrhage and (b) no apparent residual tumor after surgery.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow chart of patient enrollment. 3D-T2WI, Three-dimensional T2-weighted imaging; DWI, Diffusion-weighted imaging; PitNET, Pituitary neuroendocrine tumor; RDC-DWI, Reverse encoding distortion correction DWI

Full size image

Phantom study

To evaluate the reproducibility and accuracy of RDC-DWI, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were compared among the three DWIs (AP-DWI, B0-corrected-DWI, and RDC-DWI) and the theoretical values using a Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance−QIBA DWI phantom (Model 128, High Precision Devices, Inc., Boulder, USA). The phantom contains 13 vials filled with 30 mL of polymerpolyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) in an aqueous solution, in six concentrations of PVP (0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, and 50%) corresponding to the theoretical ADC values specified by the manufacturer. The phantom was used with the temperature maintained between -0.20 and 0.20 °C (ice water bath).

MRI parameters

All studies were performed using a 3-T MR (Vantage Centurian, Canon Medical Systems Corporation, Otawara, Japan) with a 32-channel head coil. The same technical parameters were used for the phantom study and human study. The imaging parameters for thin-slice RDC-DWI and 3D-T2WI are shown in Table 1. In addition, the b = 0 s/mm2 images were scanned once for each phase-encoding direction and the b = 1,000 s/mm2 images were scanned eight times for each phase-encoding direction with simultaneous motion probing gradients (MPGs) in three orthogonal directions.

Table 1 The imaging parameters for RDC-DWI and 3D-T2WI
Full size table

RDC-DWI

RDC-DWI is an on-console distortion correction technique used in EPI-DWI. It corrects distortion induced by eddy currents by using the b = 1,000 s/mm2 images with reverse phase-encoding direction after application of MPGs in addition to correcting distortion due to B0 field inhomogeneity by using the b = 0 s/mm2 images with reverse phase-encoding directions.

Generation of AP-DWI, B0-corrected-DWI, and RDC-DWI

AP-DWI, B0-corrected-DWI, and RDC-DWI were generated on-console from the same raw data (Fig. 2). A shift map (B0) was generated using the b = 0 s/mm2 images with AP and PA phase-encoding directions. Shift maps (B0 + Eddy) were generated using the shift map (B0) and b = 1,000 s/mm2 images with AP and PA phase-encoding directions after application of MPGs. AP-DWI was generated using the b = 0 s/mm2 images with AP phase-encoding direction and b = 1,000 s/mm2 images with AP phase-encoding direction without distortion correction. B0-corrected-DWI was generated using the b = 0 s/mm2 images with AP and PA phase-encoding directions, b = 1,000 s/mm2 images with AP phase-encoding direction, and shift map (B0). RDC-DWI was generated using the b = 0 s/mm2 images with AP and PA phase-encoding directions, b = 1,000 s/mm2 images with AP and PA phase-encoding directions, and shift maps (B0 + Eddy) for three orthogonal MPG directions. In practice, the on-console RDC-DWI generation processes after image acquisition took approximately 2:10 min:s.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Schematic image of generation of shift maps (a) and generation of three DWIs: AP-DWI, B0-corrected-DWI, and RDC-DWI (b). Shift map (B0) is generated using the b = 0 s/mm2 images with anterior-posterior (AP) and posterior-anterior (PA) phase-encoding directions (a, yellow). Shift maps (B0 + Eddy) are generated using the shift map (B0) and the b = 1,000 s/mm2 images with AP and PA phase-encoding directions after application of three orthogonal motion probing gradients (MPGs) (a, red, blue, and green). AP-DWI is an original EPI-based DWI without distortion correction (b, top). B0-corrected-DWI is generated using the b = 0 s/mm2 images with both phase-encoding directions (AP and PA), the b = 1,000 s/mm2 images with AP phase-encoding direction, and the shift map (B0) (b, middle). RDC-DWI was generated using the b = 0 s/mm2 images with both phase-encoding directions (AP and PA), the b = 1,000 s/mm2 images with both phase-encoding directions (AP and PA), and the shift maps (B0 + Eddy) with MPGs in three directions (b, bottom). AP, Anterior-posterior; DWI, Diffusion-weighted imaging; EPI, Echo-planar imaging; MPG, Motion probing gradient; PA, Posterior-anterior; RDC-DWI, Reverse encoding distortion correction DWI

Full size image

Image analysis: patient study

Qualitative evaluation

The image qualities of b = 1,000 s/mm2 images of the three DWIs (AP-DWI, B0-corrected-DWI, and RDC-DWI) were assessed for susceptibility artifact in the frontal and temporal lobes; anatomic visualization of the optic, oculomotor and trigeminal nerves; and overall tumor visualization using a 5-point Likert scale (0, very poor; 1, poor; 2, fair; 3, good; 4, excellent). Visualization of cavernous sinus invasion was assessed qualitatively using a 3-point Likert scale (0, poor; 1, fair; 2, good). Corresponding 3D-T2WI was used as the reference standard for assessing visualization of cavernous sinus invasion. The clinical course and surgical records were referred to when it was difficult to determine the extent of cavernous sinus invasion diagnosis using only 3D-T2WI. The criteria for image assessment are defined in Supplementary Figs. S1–S4. The evaluation was conducted by three board-certified neuroradiologists (S.Ok., S.Ot., and S.I., with 16, 13, and 8 years of experience in neuroradiology, respectively). The three DWIs were provided in random order, and each reader was blinded to the type of distortion correction method. The majority opinion of the raters was designated as the final value. If the three opinions differed, resolution was obtained by consensus.

Quantitative evaluation

Geometric distortion was determined as each of anterior and posterior displacement between each DWI and the corresponding 3D-T2WI in the sagittal plane using ITK-SNAP (http://www.itksnap.org/) (Fig. 3a–c) [23]. To calculate SNR, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and ADC value, regions of interest (ROIs) were placed on the pons and on a solid portion of the PitNET/pituitary adenoma on the b = 1,000 s/mm2 image and the corresponding ADC map using ImageJ (https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/) (Supplementary Fig. S5). SNR was calculated as SIpons/SDpons, and CNR was calculated as (SIlesion − SIpons)/SDpons, where SIpons and SIlesion are mean signal intensity of the pons and the solid portion of the PitNET/pituitary adenoma, respectively, and SDpons is standard deviation of the pons. ROIs that including signal pileup artifacts were excluded for evaluating CNR and ADC value for PitNET/pituitary adenomas.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Measurement of anterior and posterior sagittal displacements. The contour of a PitNET/pituitary adenoma on three-dimensional T2-weighted imaging (3D-T2WI) in the sagittal plane (a) is superimposed on the corresponding reconstructed sagittal diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) (c). Geometric distortion (b, arrows) is determined as anterior and posterior displacements between DWI and the corresponding 3D-T2WI (c). The boxplots show results of anterior and posterior sagittal displacements (d). Anterior sagittal displacement is the least in RDC-DWI and is significantly lower in B0-corrected-DWI than in AP-DWI. Posterior sagittal displacement is significantly lower in RDC-DWI and B0-corrected-DWI than in AP-DWI. 3D-T2WI, Three-dimensional T2-weighted imaging; AP, Anterior-posterior; DWI, Diffusion-weighted imaging; EPI, Echo-planar imaging; PA, Posterior-anterior; PitNET, Pituitary neuroendocrine tumor; RDC-DWI, Reverse encoding distortion correction DWI

Full size image

Evaluation of distortion and ROI measurements were performed by a board-certified radiologist (S.I.) and approved by another board-certified radiologist (S.Ok.).

Image analysis: phantom study

ROIs of area 212 mm2 were drawn on six different slices of the 13 vials with PVP concentrations of 0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, and 50% (Fig. 4a). The mean ADC values were measured on ADC maps for the three DWIs (AP-DWI, B0-corrected-DWI, and RDC-DWI) by a board-certified radiologist (S.I.) using ImageJ. Data of vials with 50% PVP were discarded because of air contamination (Fig. 4b–d).

Fig. 4
figure 4

QIBA DWI phantom. Photograph of shows 13 vials containing PVP within the phantom, with PVP concentrations of 0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, and 50% (a). The b = 1,000 s/mm2 images of the phantom acquired with AP-DWI (b), B0-corrected-DWI (c), and RDC-DWI (d) are shown. Compared with AP-DWI and B0-corrected-DWI, RDC-DWI shows the least distortion and fewest susceptibility artifacts (b, c, and d, arrows). Air contamination is observed in one of the 50% PVP vials (b, c, and d, arrowheads). AP, Anterior-posterior; DWI, Diffusion-weighted imaging; PVP, Polymerpolyvinylpyrrolidone; QIBA, Quantitative Imaging Biomarkers Alliance; RDC-DWI, Reverse encoding distortion correction DWI

Full size image

Statistical analysis

Interrater reliability for image quality scores measured independently by the three radiologists was evaluated using Fleiss’ κ statistics [24]. The calculated κ statistic was interpreted as follows: ≤ 0.20, slight agreement; 0.21–0.40, fair agreement; 0.41–0.60, moderate agreement; 0.61–0.80, substantial agreement; and 0.81–1.00, almost perfect agreement. Image quality scores and measured displacements were compared among the three DWIs using the Friedman test followed by pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction because the results did not follow a normal distribution. SNR, CNR, and ADC values were also compared among the three DWIs using one-way repeated measures analysis of variance−ANOVA followed by pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction because these data followed a normal distribution. A p-value less than 0.050 was considered statistically significant.

Fleiss’ κ statistics and Friedman test were performed using RStudio Software (version 2022.12.0, RStudio, PBC, Boston, USA), and analysis of variance was performed using MedCalc version 20 (MedCalc Software, Ostend, Belgium).

Results

Patient study

Participants

Six patients with PitNET/pituitary adenoma with hemorrhage and 19 patients with no apparent residual tumor after surgery were excluded (Fig. 1). The remaining 64 patients (mean age, 70.8 ± 9.9 years [mean ± standard deviation]; 33 females) were evaluated and comprised 25 patients with unoperated clinically non-functioning PitNET/pituitary adenoma and 39 patients with residual non-functioning PitNET/pituitary adenoma after surgery. The demographics of all 64 participants are shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Patient demographics
Full size table

Qualitative evaluation

Interrater reliability for qualitative evaluations was moderate to substantial agreement (κ = 0.59–0.78) (Supplementary Table S1). In 11 cases of cavernous sinus invasion, the diagnosis was determined with agreement of the three evaluators by also referring to the clinical course and surgical records because of difficulty using only 3D-T2WI.

Image quality scores and p-values are summarized in Table 3 and Supplementary Fig. S6. Scores for susceptibility artifacts in the frontal and temporal lobes were the best in RDC-DWI (median, 2.0; interquartile range, 2.0–2.0 and 2.0; 2.0–2.0, respectively) and significantly better in B0-corrected-DWI (2.0; 1.5–2.0 and 2.0; 2.0–2.0, respectively) than in AP-DWI (1.0; 1.0–1.0 and 1.0; 1.0–2.0, respectively). Scores for overall tumor visualization and anatomical visualization of the left trigeminal nerve were also the best in RDC-DWI (3.0; 3.0–4.0 and 4.0; 3.0–4.0, respectively) and were significantly better in B0-corrected-DWI (3.0; 3.0–3.0 and 3.0; 3.0–4.0, respectively) than in AP-DWI (2.0; 2.0–3.0 and 3.0; 3.0–4.0, respectively). Scores for anatomical visualization of the right oculomotor and right trigeminal nerves were significantly better in RDC-DWI (3.0; 2.0–3.0 and 4.0; 3.0–4.0, respectively) than in B0-corrected-DWI (3.0; 2.0–3.0 and 3.0; 3.0–3.0, respectively) and AP-DWI (3.0; 2.0–3.0 and 3.0; 3.0–3.0, respectively), but there was no significant difference between B0-corrected-DWI and AP-DWI. Scores for visualization of cavernous sinus invasion were significantly better in RDC-DWI (2.0; 2.0–2.0) and B0-corrected-DWI (2.0; 2.0–2.0) than in AP-DWI (1.0; 0.0–2.0), but there was no significant difference between RDC-DWI and B0-corrected-DWI. Score for anatomical visualization of the left optic nerve was better in B0-corrected-DWI (3.0; 3.0–3.0) than in AP-DWI (3.0; 3.0–3.0), but there was no significant difference between RDC-DWI (3.0; 3.0–3.0) and AP-DWI or between RDC-DWI and B0-corrected-DWI. Scores for anatomical visualization of the right optic and left oculomotor nerves showed no significant difference among the three DWIs. Representative images of the three DWIs are shown in Fig. 5 and Supplementary Fig. S7.

Table 3 Results of qualitative evaluations for AP-DWI, B0-corrected-DWI, and RDC-DWI
Full size table
Fig. 5
figure 5

A 68-year-old woman with residual non-functioning PitNET/pituitary adenoma after surgery. Axial 3D-T2WI (a), axial b = 1,000 s/mm2 images of AP-DWI (b), B0-corrected-DWI (c), and RDC-DWI (d) are shown. The residual PitNET/pituitary adenoma cannot be clearly distinguished from the right cavernous sinus on axial 3D-T2WI (a). There is severe distortion, susceptibility artifact, and signal pileup around the residual PitNET/pituitary adenoma and the left trigeminal nerve on AP-DWI (b, arrows). B0-corrected-DWI and RDC-DWI depict undistorted residual PitNET/pituitary adenoma without apparent susceptibility artifact (c and d). Compared with B0-corrected DWI, there is less blurring on RDC-DWI, particularly in the sphenoid sinus (c, arrowheads), and there are fewer susceptibility artifacts in the left trigeminal nerve (c, arrow). 3D-T2WI, Three-dimensional T2-weighted imaging; AP, Anterior-posterior; DWI, Diffusion-weighted imaging; PitNET, Pituitary neuroendocrine tumor; RDC-DWI, Reverse encoding distortion correction DWI

Full size image

Quantitative evaluation

Anterior sagittal displacement due to geometric distortion was the least in RDC-DWI (median, 2.8 mm; interquartile range, 1.8–4.7 mm) (p < 0.001) and significantly lower in B0-corrected-DWI (3.8 mm; 2.4–5.5 mm) than in AP-DWI (7.4 mm; 4.3–10.5 mm) (p < 0.001). Posterior sagittal displacement was significantly lower in RDC-DWI (2.0 mm; 1.4–3.5 mm) and B0-corrected-DWI (2.6 mm; 1.6–3.9 mm) than in AP-DWI (3.8 mm; 2.3–6.2 mm) (p < 0.001). The measured value of posterior sagittal displacement was the least in RDC-DWI. There was no significant difference between RDC-DWI and B0-corrected-DWI (p = 0.065) (Fig. 3d).

Table 4 lists the SNR, CNR, and ADC values. SNR was the highest in RDC-DWI and was significantly higher in AP-DWI (p < 0.001) than in B0-corrected-DWI (p = 0.001). After excluding 26 patients in whom ROIs contained signal pileup artifacts, CNR and ADC values of the solid portion of PitNET/pituitary adenomas were calculated in 38 patients. Among the three DWIs, CNR was the highest in RDC-DWI, and CNR was significantly higher in RDC-DWI than in B0-corrected-DWI (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in CNR between B0-corrected-DWI and AP-DWI (p = 1.000), or between RDC-DWI and AP-DWI (p = 0.094). There was no significant difference in ADC values of the pons or the solid portion of PitNET/pituitary adenomas among the three DWIs.

Table 4 SNR, CNR, and ADC values according to DWI type
Full size table

Phantom study

The b = 1,000 s/mm2 images on RDC-DWI showed the fewest artifacts and least distortion among the three DWIs (AP-DWI, B0-corrected-DWI, and RDC-DWI) (Fig. 4b, c, and d). ADC values measured in each of the five PVP concentrations showed no significant difference among the three DWIs for concentrations of 0%, 30%, and 40% (Table 5). Statistically significant differences in ADC values were found at PVP concentrations of 10% and 20%; however, ADC values at these two concentrations on RDC-DWI were the closest to the theoretical ADC values provided by the manufacturer [25].

Table 5 ADC values (× 10-6 mm2/s) of PVP vials in the phantom study according to DWI type
Full size table

Discussion

The present study demonstrated that thin-slice EPI-based RDC-DWI with a novel on-console distortion correction technique enabled excellent visualization of the pituitary region and surrounding normal structures. Overall, RDC-DWI outperformed the other DWIs (B0-corrected-DWI and AP-DWI), exhibiting the best image quality in terms of susceptibility artifacts, geometric distortion, visualization of cranial nerves and cavernous sinus invasion, and overall tumor visualization. The excellent visualization on RDC-DWI results from its characteristic image acquisition and distortion correction. The on-console distortion correction technique of RDC-DWI is based on the b = 1,000 s/mm2 images with reverse phase-encoding directions after application of MPGs in three orthogonal directions, in addition to the b = 0 s/mm2 images with reverse phase-encoding directions. Therefore, RDC-DWI achieved combined correction of distortion due to B0 field inhomogeneity and of eddy current-induced distortion. Moreover, the on-console distortion correction of RDC-DWI is more feasible in clinical practice than the existing off-console distortion correction tools [17,18,19,20].

In addition to reduction in susceptibility artifacts and distortion, RDC-DWI produced high-contrast images and had the highest SNR among the three DWIs (AP-DWI, B0-corrected-DWI, and RDC-DWI) even with slice thickness of 1.2 mm, which was achieved by two-fold number of excitations, combining images with AP and PA phase-encoding directions. Measurement of precise SNR in DWI after application of distortion correction is complicated; in the present study, however, RDC-DWI provided images with high SNR, whereas in previous studies, no DWI technique has achieved SNR higher than that of conventional EPI-DWI [8, 10, 12, 26]. Furthermore, compared with previously reported DWI techniques with distortion reduction, slice thickness of 1.2 mm in RDC-DWI resulted in higher spatial resolution with distortion correction and enabled observation from multiple directions using multiplanar reconstruction of the pituitary lesion and surrounding normal structures [7, 8, 10,11,12,13].

We also assessed the accuracy of RDC-DWI for visualizing cavernous sinus invasion by PitNET/pituitary adenoma, which has not been evaluated previously on DWI. Scores for visualization of cavernous sinus invasion were significantly better for RDC-DWI and B0-corrected-DWI than for AP-DWI. Based on our results, RDC-DWI and B0-corrected-DWI might visualize cavernous sinus invasion well even without contrast medium [27,28,29,30]. With regard to postoperative cases in particular, RDC-DWI and B0-corrected-DWI can contribute to early detection and visualization of residual PitNET/pituitary adenoma in the cavernous sinus [5, 31]. Occasionally, residual PitNET/pituitary adenoma in the cavernous sinus can be difficult to assess on T2-weighted or contrast-enhanced T1-weighted images after surgery due to postoperative change [32]; however, RDC-DWI is better able to visualize residual PitNET/pituitary adenoma compared with other sequences because the venous pool of the cavernous sinus appears as a signal void on DWI.

Among the three DWIs, RDC-DWI showed the best visualization of both the trigeminal and right oculomotor nerves. This finding indicates that RDC-DWI had fewer susceptibility artifacts than B0-corrected-DWI, for the reason that susceptibility artifact is strongest where the cranial nerves pass near the paranasal sinuses. Anatomical visualization of the optic nerves was not superior on RDC-DWI, probably because the optic chiasma or optic nerves were compressed in more than half of the studied cases, and there might have been minimal air space between the optic nerves and the PitNET/pituitary adenomas.

The acquisition time for thin-slice RDC-DWI was 4:15 min:s. Scan times were also long in previously reported advanced DWI techniques for the pituitary region, such as line-scan DWI [8], periodically rotated overlapping parallel lines with enhanced reconstruction (PROPELLER)/BLADE DWI [9, 10], turbo-spin-echo (TSE) DWI [12, 13], and readout-segmented EPI-DWI [14, 15], although parameters such as slice thickness, number of slices, field of view, and number of excitations were different from RDC-DWI. Scan time is longer for RDC-DWI than conventional EPI-DWI but is clinically acceptable considering the clinical usefulness of RDC-DWI in the pituitary region, as shown in this study. Distortion correction techniques with deep learning reconstruction might have potential to reduce scan time and improve image quality, although its usefulness and advantages remain unclear [33].

Our study has several limitations. First, we included images in both pre- and post-operative states. RDC-DWI seemed to have the best visualization both preoperatively and postoperatively, although we did not conduct a comparison. Second, we used 3D-T2WI as the reference in evaluating visualization of cavernous sinus invasion. Cavernous sinus invasion is generally diagnosed with contrast-enhanced T1WI [27, 28, 30, 32]; however, many of the present patients did not undergo contrast-enhanced MRI. We referred to the clinical course and surgical records when it was difficult to determine the diagnosis using only 3D-T2WI. Finally, we included relatively considerable number of patients; however, more pre- and postoperative patients may be needed to generalize our results. Further evaluation in other pituitary lesions is also desirable. In addition, in our phantom study, the 50% PVP data were discarded due to air contamination. The other phantom study on RDC-DWI seems more reliable [22].

In conclusion, thin-slice RDC-DWI provided excellent image quality in terms of distortion, susceptibility artifact, and visualization of tumor and surrounding normal structures. RDC-DWI achieved accurate and high-contrast visualization with high spatial resolution, using an on-console combined correction for distortion due to B0 field inhomogeneity and eddy current-induced distortion. Thin-slice RDC-DWI facilitates visualization of the pituitary region and surrounding normal structures even without contrast medium.

Availability of data and materials

Data generated or analyzed during the study are available from the corresponding author by request.

Abbreviations

3D-T2WI:

Three-dimensional T2-weighted imaging

ADC:

Apparent diffusion coefficient

AP:

Anterior-posterior

CNR:

Contrast-to-noise ratio

DWI:

Diffusion-weighted imaging

EPI:

Echo-planar imaging

MPG:

Motion probing gradient

PA:

Posterior-anterior

PitNET:

Pituitary neuroendocrine tumor

PVP:

Polymerpolyvinylpyrrolidone

RDC-DWI:

Reverse encoding distortion correction DWI

ROI:

Region of interest

SNR:

Signal-to-noise ratio

References

  1. Provenzale JM, Mukundan S, Barboriak DP (2006) Diffusion-weighted and perfusion MR imaging for brain tumor characterization and assessment of treatment response. Radiology 239:632–649. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2393042031

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Pierallini A, Caramia F, Falcone C et al (2006) Pituitary macroadenomas: preoperative evaluation of consistency with diffusion-weighted MR imaging--initial experience. Radiology 239:223–231. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2383042204

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tamrazi B, Pekmezci M, Aboian M, Tihan T, Glastonbury CM (2017) Apparent diffusion coefficient and pituitary macroadenomas: pre-operative assessment of tumor atypia. Pituitary 20:195–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11102-016-0759-5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Boxerman JL, Rogg JM, Donahue JE, Machan JT, Goldman MA, Doberstein CE (2010) Preoperative MRI evaluation of pituitary macroadenoma: imaging features predictive of successful transsphenoidal surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:720–728. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.4128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hassan HA, Bessar MA, Herzallah IR, Laury AM, Arnaout MM, Basha MAA (2018) Diagnostic value of early postoperative MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging following trans-sphenoidal resection of non-functioning pituitary macroadenomas. Clin Radiol 73:535–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2017.12.007

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jezzard P, Balaban RS (1995) Correction for geometric distortion in echo planar images from B0 field variations. Magn Reson Med 34:65–73. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.1910340111

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kunii N, Abe T, Kawamo M, Tanioka D, Izumiyama H, Moritani T (2007) Rathke’s cleft cysts: differentiation from other cystic lesions in the pituitary fossa by use of single-shot fast spin-echo diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 149:759–769. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-007-1234-x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Suzuki C, Maeda M, Hori K et al (2007) Apparent diffusion coefficient of pituitary macroadenoma evaluated with line-scan diffusion-weighted imaging. J Neuroradiol 34:228–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurad.2007.06.007

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mahmoud OM, Tominaga A, Amatya VJ et al (2011) Role of PROPELLER diffusion-weighted imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient in the evaluation of pituitary adenomas. Eur J Radiol 80:412–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.05.023

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yiping L, Hui L, Kun Z, Daoying G, Bo Y (2014) Diffusion-weighted imaging of the sellar region: a comparison study of BLADE and single-shot echo planar imaging sequences. Eur J Radiol 83:1239–1244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.03.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wang M, Liu H, Wei X et al (2018) Application of reduced-FOV diffusion-weighted imaging in evaluation of normal pituitary glands and pituitary macroadenomas. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 39:1499–1504. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A5735

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Khant ZA, Azuma M, Kadota Y et al (2019) Evaluation of pituitary structures and lesions with turbo spin-echo diffusion-weighted imaging. J Neurol Sci 405:116390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jns.2019.07.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kamimura K, Nakajo M, Fukukura Y et al (2016) Intravoxel incoherent motion in normal pituitary gland: initial study with turbo spin-echo diffusion-weighted imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 37:2328–2333. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4930

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Su CQ, Zhang X, Pan T et al (2020) Texture analysis of high b-value diffusion-weighted imaging for evaluating consistency of pituitary macroadenomas. J Magn Reson Imaging 51:1507–1513. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.26941

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rutland JW, Loewenstern J, Ranti D et al (2020) Analysis of 7-tesla diffusion-weighted imaging in the prediction of pituitary macroadenoma consistency. J Neurosurg 134:771–779. https://doi.org/10.3171/2019.12.JNS192940

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Fu Q, Kong XC, Liu DX et al (2021) Clinical comparison of single-shot EPI, readout-segmented EPI and TGSE-BLADE for diffusion-weighted imaging of cerebellopontine angle tumors on 3 tesla. Magn Reson Imaging 84:76–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2021.09.009

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Andersson JL, Skare S, Ashburner J (2003) How to correct susceptibility distortions in spin-echo echo-planar images: application to diffusion tensor imaging. Neuroimage 20:870–888. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00336-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Morgan PS, Bowtell RW, McIntyre DJ, Worthington BS (2004) Correction of spatial distortion in EPI due to inhomogeneous static magnetic fields using the reversed gradient method. J Magn Reson Imaging 19:499–507. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.20032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Andersson JLR, Sotiropoulos SN (2016) An integrated approach to correction for off-resonance effects and subject movement in diffusion MR imaging. Neuroimage 125:1063–1078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.10.019

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sjöholm T, Kullberg J, Strand R, Engström M, Ahlström H, Malmberg F (2022) Improved geometric accuracy of whole body diffusion-weighted imaging at 1.5T and 3T using reverse polarity gradients. Sci Rep 12:11605. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-15872-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  21. Ueda T, Ohno Y, Shinohara M et al (2023) Reverse encoding distortion correction for diffusion-weighted MRI: efficacy for improving image quality and ADC evaluation for differentiating malignant from benign areas in suspected prostatic cancer patients. Eur J Radiol 162:110764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.110764

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Numamoto H, Fujimoto K, Miyake KK et al (2023) Evaluating reproducibility of the ADC and distortion in diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with reverse encoding distortion correction (RDC). Magn Reson Med Sci. https://doi.org/10.2463/mrms.mp.2023-0102

  23. Yushkevich PA, Piven J, Hazlett HC et al (2006) User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. Neuroimage 31:1116–1128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Fleiss J (1971) Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull 76:378–382. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0031619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Keenan KE, Carnicka S, Gottlieb SC, Stupic KF (2017) Assessing changes in MRI measurands incurred in a scanner upgrade: is my study comprised?. In: Proceedings of the ISMRM 25th Annual Meeting, Honolulu, 22−24 April 2017. P. 3922

  26. Okuchi S, Fushimi Y, Yoshida K et al (2022) Comparison of TGSE-BLADE DWI, RESOLVE DWI, and SS-EPI DWI in healthy volunteers and patients after cerebral aneurysm clipping. Sci Rep 12:17689. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-22760-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. Knosp E, Steiner E, Kitz K, Matula C (1993) Pituitary adenomas with invasion of the cavernous sinus space: a magnetic resonance imaging classification compared with surgical findings. Neurosurgery 33:610–617. https://doi.org/10.1227/00006123-199310000-00008

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Cottier JP, Destrieux C, Brunereau L et al (2000) Cavernous sinus invasion by pituitary adenoma: MR imaging. Radiology 215:463–469. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.215.2.r00ap18463

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Cao L, Chen H, Hong J, Ma M, Zhong Q, Wang S (2013) Magnetic resonance imaging appearance of the medial wall of the cavernous sinus for the assessment of cavernous sinus invasion by pituitary adenomas. J Neuroradiol 40:245–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurad.2013.06.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Micko AS, Wöhrer A, Wolfsberger S, Knosp E (2015) Invasion of the cavernous sinus space in pituitary adenomas: endoscopic verification and its correlation with an MRI-based classification. J Neurosurg 122:803–811. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.12.JNS141083

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Ko CC, Chen TY, Lim SW, Kuo YT, Wu TC, Chen JH (2019) Prediction of recurrence in solid nonfunctioning pituitary macroadenomas: additional benefits of diffusion-weighted MR imaging. J Neurosurg 132:351–359. https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.10.JNS181783

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kim M, Kim HS, Kim HJ et al (2021) Thin-slice pituitary MRI with deep learning-based reconstruction: diagnostic performance in a postoperative setting. Radiology 298:114–122. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020200723

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hu Z, Wang Y, Zhang Z et al (2020) Distortion correction of single-shot EPI enabled by deep-learning. Neuroimage 221:117170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Mr. Yuichiro Sano and Mr. Nobuyasu Ichinose for their technical support.

We did not use LLMs for our manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers 21K20834, 21K15826, and 22K07746; by ISHIZUE 2023 of Kyoto University and by The Kyoto University Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 54 Shogoin Kawaharacho, Sakyoku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan

    Shuichi Ito, Sachi Okuchi, Yasutaka Fushimi, Sayo Otani, Krishna Pandu Wicaksono, Akihiko Sakata, Satoshi Nakajima, Hiroshi Tagawa & Yuji Nakamoto

  2. Department of Advanced Imaging in Medical Magnetic Resonance, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 54 Shogoin Kawaharacho, Sakyoku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan

    Kanae Kawai Miyake, Hitomi Numamoto, Tsuneo Saga & Koji Fujimoto

  3. Department of Neurosurgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 54 Shogoin Kawaharacho, Sakyoku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan

    Masahiro Tanji, Noritaka Sano & Yoshiki Arakawa

  4. MRI Systems Division, Canon Medical Systems Corporation, 1385 Shimoishigami, Otawara, 324-8550, Japan

    Hiroki Kondo & Rimika Imai

Authors
  1. Shuichi Ito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sachi Okuchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yasutaka Fushimi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sayo Otani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Krishna Pandu Wicaksono
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Akihiko Sakata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Kanae Kawai Miyake
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Hitomi Numamoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Satoshi Nakajima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Hiroshi Tagawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Masahiro Tanji
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Noritaka Sano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Hiroki Kondo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Rimika Imai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Tsuneo Saga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Koji Fujimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Yoshiki Arakawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Yuji Nakamoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Study concepts/study design or data acquisition or data analysis/interpretation, all authors; manuscript drafting, SI, SOk, YF; approval of final version of submitted manuscript, all authors; agrees to ensure any questions related to the work are appropriately resolved, all authors; literature research, SI, SOk; clinical studies, SI, SOk; statistical analysis, SI, SOk; and manuscript editing, all authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sachi Okuchi.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained (Kyoto University Graduate School and Faculty of Medicine, Ethics Committee, reference number R3706). Written informed consent was not required for this study because of its retrospective nature. Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

Hiroki Kondo and Rimika Imai are the employees of Canon Medical Systems Corporation. Koji Fujimoto, Tsuneo Saga, Kanae Kawai Miyake, and Hitomi Numamoto belong to the endowed chair of Industry-Academia Collaboration Project between Kyoto University and Canon Medical Systems Corporation. The remaining authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: Supplementary Table S1.

Interrater reliability of qualitative evaluations. Supplementary Figure S1. Image assessment criteria for susceptibility artifacts. Arrows indicate susceptibility artifacts. The slice with the strongest artifacts is evaluated. Score 0 (very poor), artifacts at almost all edges of the frontal or temporal lobe. Score 1 (poor), many linear artifacts (a and d). Score 2 (fair), some linear artifacts (b and e). Score 3 (good), spotty artifacts or artifacts with lower signal intensity compared with typical signal pileup artifacts (c and f). Score 4 (excellent), no artifacts. Supplementary Figure S2. Criteria for image assessment of cranial nerves. Arrows indicate signal loss along the cranial nerves. Score 0 (very poor), no anatomical visualization of the nerve. Score 1 (poor), only a small portion of the nerve is seen (d, right arrowhead). Score 2 (fair), part of the course of the nerve is seen (d, left). Score 3 (good), most of the course of the nerve is seen (a, bilateral; b, bilateral; e, right). Score 4 (excellent), the whole course of the nerve is clearly delineated (c, bilateral; e, left; f, bilateral). Supplementary Figure S3. Image assessment criteria for visualization of cavernous sinus invasion. Coronal reconstructed b = 1,000 s/mm2 images of AP-DWI (b and f), B0-corrected-DWI (c and g), and RDC-DWI (d and h) are evaluated in comparison with the corresponding coronal reconstructed three-dimensional T2-weighted imaging (3D-T2WI) (a and e). Red lines indicate the medial and lateral walls of the internal carotid arteries. Score 0 (poor), PitNET/pituitary adenoma is not well visualized in the cavernous sinus (b and f). Score 1 (fair), PitNET/pituitary adenoma is seen in the cavernous sinus, but the diagnosis of cavernous sinus invasion differs between DWI and 3D-T2WI. Score 2 (good), PitNET/pituitary adenoma is seen clearly in the cavernous sinus on DWI and the diagnosis of cavernous sinus invasion is the same on DWI and 3D-T2WI (c, d, g, and h, arrows). Supplementary Figure S4. Image assessment criteria for overall tumor visualization. Axial b = 1,000 s/mm2 images of AP-DWI (b), B0-corrected-DWI (c), and RDC-DWI (d) are evaluated in comparison with the corresponding axial reconstructed 3D-T2WI (a). Score 0 (very poor), tumor is not seen. Score 1 (poor), only a portion of the PitNET/pituitary adenoma is seen. Score 2 (fair), the PitNET/pituitary adenoma is seen, but its shape is distorted (b, arrow). Score 3 (good), most of the PitNET/pituitary adenoma is clearly seen, but the image is degraded by distortion (arrow) and blurring around the sphenoid sinus (arrowheads) (c). Score 4 (excellent), the PitNET/pituitary adenoma is clearly seen (d). Supplementary Figure S5. Example showing regions of interest (ROIs) placement. A ROI (yellow oval) is placed on the pons on AP-DWI (a), B0-corrected-DWI (b), and RDC-DWI (c); and also on the solid portion of the PitNET/pituitary adenoma on AP-DWI (d), B0-corrected-DWI (e), and RDC-DWI (f). Supplementary Figure S6. Histograms of qualitative evaluations. Susceptibility artifacts in the frontal and temporal lobes, anatomical visualization of cranial nerves, and overall tumor visualization are assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. Visualization of cavernous sinus invasion is assessed using a 3-point Likert scale. Image quality scores are compared among the three DWIs (AP-DWI, B0-corrected-DWI, and RDC-DWI) using the Friedman test followed by pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction. Supplementary Figure S7. A 79-year-old woman with unoperated clinically non-functioning PitNET/pituitary adenoma. Sagittal three-dimensional T2-weighted imaging (3D-T2WI) (a) and the corresponding reconstructed sagittal b = 1,000 s/mm2 images of AP-DWI (b), B0-corrected-DWI (c), and RDC-DWI (d) are shown. The 3D-T2WI shows the typical appearance of PitNET/pituitary adenoma (a). Severe geometric distortion, susceptibility artifacts, and signal pileup near the sphenoid sinus are seen on AP-DWI (b, arrows). There is less distortion on the B0-corrected-DWI; however, abnormal signal remains (c, arrows), along with blurring near the sphenoid sinus (c, arrowheads). Among the three DWIs, image quality is the best for RDC-DWI, which has the least geometric distortion and fewest susceptibility artifacts (d).

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ito, S., Okuchi, S., Fushimi, Y. et al. Thin-slice reverse encoding distortion correction DWI facilitates visualization of non-functioning pituitary neuroendocrine tumor (PitNET)/pituitary adenoma and surrounding normal structures. Eur Radiol Exp 8, 28 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41747-024-00430-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41747-024-00430-8

Keywords