To compare the detectability of vertebral metastatic disease on T1-weighted, short-inversion-time inversion recovery (STIR), fast spin-echo (FSE), fat-saturated FSE, and inversion recovery FSE (IRFSE) MR sequences using percent contrast and contrast-to-noise ratios.Patients with proved metastatic disease underwent imaging on a 1.5-T MR system with sagittal T1-weighted (800/20/2 [repetition time/echo time/excitations]) (91 patients), STIR (1400/43/2; inversion time, 140) (91 patients), FSE (4000/180/2) (46 patients), fat-saturated FSE (4000/180/2) (16 patients), and IRFSE (29 patients) sequences. Percent contrast and contrast-to-noise ratio were calculated for the lesions. The number of metastatic lesions detected with each of the pulse sequences was also calculated.Mean percent contrast was, for T1-weighted sequence, -42.2 +/- 1%; STIR, 262 +/- 34%; FSE, 121 +/- 21%; fat-saturated FSE, 182 +/- 6%; and IRFSE, 272 +/- 47%. The mean contrast-to-noise ratio for T1-weighted was -4.63 +/- 1.7; STIR, 10.8 +/- .98; FSE, 4.16 +/- .76; fat-saturated FSE, 4.87 +/- .19; and IRFSE, 5.2 +/- .87. STIR and IRFSE showed the highest number of lesions, followed by T1-weighted, fat-saturated FSE, and FSE sequences. T1-weighted sequences showed 94%, FSE 55%, and fat-saturated FSE 78% of the lesions detected. Epidural metastatic lesions were better depicted on T1-weighted, FSE, and fat-saturated FSE sequences.STIR was superior to both T1-weighted and FSE (with and without fat saturation) for detection of metastatic lesions, in terms of both percent contrast and contrast-to-noise ratio and visibility. IRFSE was equal to STIR for the detection of metastasis by both subjective and objective criteria. T1-weighted, FSE, and fat-saturated FSE sequences were superior to STIR and IRFSE in the detection of epidural metastatic disease. IRFSE provided faster scanning time, which could be translated into greater resolution.
View details for Web of Science ID A1995QG57400009
View details for PubMedID 7726074