OBJECTIVES We aimed to evaluate the agreement in the detection of cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) between conventional susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) and fast SWI using wave-controlled aliasing in parallel imaging (CAIPI) acceleration. We also scrutinized the diagnostic agreement for intracranial lesions and compared the image quality between both sequences. METHODS Institutional review board approval was obtained and informed consent was waived for this retrospective study. We included 181 consecutive patients who had undergone brain MRI with both conventional SWI (scan time, 251 s) and wave-CAIPI SWI (scan time, 113 s) from September 2017 to November 2017. All images were independently reviewed by two radiologists for the detection and counting of CMBs using the Microbleed Anatomical Rating Scale (MARS). One neuroradiologist diagnosed intracranial lesions and scored image quality using visual analysis. The agreement for detection of CMBs and intracranial lesions was calculated, and interobserver agreements were analyzed by using kappa and intraclass correlation. RESULTS For detection of CMBs, both the conventional and wave-CAIPI SWI showed significantly high agreement of 100% for the presence of CMBs, and 94.5% using MARS. Wave-CAIPI SWI achieved more than 97% agreement of MARS when divided by anatomical locations, with excellent agreement. Interobserver agreements were also excellent. The diagnosis for intracranial lesions (33 lesions in 28 patients) demonstrated 100% agreement. The image quality of both sequences is not significantly different (p = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS Wave-CAIPI SWI achieved high agreement for CMB detection and diagnosis of intracranial lesions compared to conventional SWI within half of the scan time. KEY POINTS • Wave-CAIPI SWI achieves a diagnostic performance for the detection of cerebral microbleeds that is comparable to that of conventional SWI in half the scan time. • Interobserver agreement for the detection (presence vs. absence) and counting of cerebral microbleeds of wave-CAIPI SWI was excellent. • Wave-CAIPI SWI demonstrated a 100% agreement for the diagnosis of intracranial lesions and comparable image quality compared to conventional SWI.

中文翻译：

---

Wave-CAIPI 磁化率加权成像在一半的扫描时间内实现了与传统磁化率加权成像相当的诊断性能。

目的 我们的目的是评估常规磁化率加权成像 (SWI) 和使用波控混叠并行成像 (CAIPI) 加速的快速 SWI 检测脑微出血 (CMB) 的一致性。我们还仔细检查了颅内病变的诊断一致性，并比较了两个序列之间的图像质量。方法 本回顾性研究获得机构审查委员会的批准并放弃知情同意。我们纳入了 181 名连续患者，他们在 2017 年 9 月至 2017 年 11 月期间接受了常规 SWI（扫描时间，251 秒）和 wave-CAIPI SWI（扫描时间，113 秒）脑部 MRI。所有图像均由两名放射科医师独立审查使用微出血解剖评定量表 (MARS) 检测和计数 CMB。一位神经放射学家诊断颅内病变并使用视觉分析对图像质量进行评分。计算 CMB 和颅内病变检测的一致性，并使用 kappa 和组内相关分析观察者间一致性。结果 对于 CMB 的检测，常规 SWI 和 wave-CAIPI SWI 均显示出 100% 的 CMB 存在显着高一致性，使用 MARS 的一致性为 94.5%。当按解剖位置划分时，Wave-CAIPI SWI 与 MARS 的一致性达到 97% 以上，一致性极佳。观察者间协议也非常好。颅内病变的诊断（28 名患者有 33 个病变）表现出 100% 的一致性。两个序列的图像质量没有显着差异 (p = 0.20)。结论 与传统 SWI 相比，Wave-CAIPI SWI 在 CMB 检测和颅内病变诊断方面的一致性高，扫描时间缩短了一半。要点 • Wave-CAIPI SWI 在检测脑微出血方面的诊断性能可与传统 SWI 相媲美，扫描时间仅为其一半。• 观察者间对波-CAIPI SWI 脑微出血检测（存在与不存在）和计数的一致性非常好。• 与传统SWI 相比，Wave-CAIPI SWI 在颅内病变诊断和图像质量方面表现出100% 的一致性。要点 • Wave-CAIPI SWI 在检测脑微出血方面的诊断性能可与传统 SWI 相媲美，扫描时间仅为其一半。• 观察者间对波-CAIPI SWI 脑微出血检测（存在与不存在）和计数的一致性非常好。• 与传统SWI 相比，Wave-CAIPI SWI 在颅内病变诊断和图像质量方面表现出100% 的一致性。要点 • Wave-CAIPI SWI 在检测脑微出血方面的诊断性能可与传统 SWI 相媲美，扫描时间仅为其一半。• 观察者间对波-CAIPI SWI 脑微出血检测（存在与不存在）和计数的一致性非常好。• 与传统SWI 相比，Wave-CAIPI SWI 在颅内病变诊断和图像质量方面表现出100% 的一致性。