Quality Comparison of 3 Tesla multiparametric MRI of the prostate using a flexible surface receiver coil versus conventional surface coil plus endorectal coil setup.

PURPOSE: To subjectively and quantitatively compare the quality of 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate acquired with a novel flexible surface coil (FSC) and with a conventional endorectal coil (ERC). METHODS: Six radiologists independently reviewed 200 pairs of axial, high-resolution T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted image data sets, each containing one examination acquired with the FSC and one with the ERC, respectively. Readers selected their preferred examination from each pair and assessed every single examination using six quality criteria on 4-point scales. Signal-to-noise ratios were measured and compared. RESULTS: Two readers preferred FSC acquisition (36.5-45%) over ERC acquisition (13.5-15%) for both sequences combined, and four readers preferred ERC acquisition (41-46%). Analysis of pooled responses for both sequences from all readers shows no significant preference for FSC or ERC. Analysis of the individual sequences revealed a pooled preference for the FSC in T2WI (38.7% vs 17.8%) and for the ERC in DWI (50.9% vs 19.6%). Patients' weight was the only weak predictor of a preference for the ERC acquisition (p = 0.04). SNR and CNR were significantly higher in the ERC acquisitions (p<0.001) except CNR differentiating tumor lesions from benign prostate (p=0.1). CONCLUSION: Although readers have strong individual preferences, comparable subjective image quality can be obtained for prostate MRI with an ERC and the novel FSC. ERC imaging might be particularly valuable for sequences with inherently lower SNR as DWI and larger patients whereas the FSC is generally preferred in T2WI. FSC imaging generates a lower SNR than with an ERC.

Outcome of polyester cuff retention following traction removal of tunneled central venous catheters.

PURPOSE: To elucidate the factors that contribute to cuff retention during traction removal of tunneled catheters, as well as to determine the risk of complication associated with polyester cuff retention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 428 tunneled, cuffed catheters were removed with traction and local anesthesia. Polyester cuff retention was recorded when it occurred, and the effects of cuff retention were determined at a mean follow-up of 250 days. Statistical analysis was performed to determine the variables influencing cuff retention. RESULTS: Traction removal was successful in 428 (100%) patients. Of 428 catheters removed, 41 (10%) cuffs were retained. Silicone 10-F double-lumen and 9.6-F single-lumen catheters had a higher rate of cuff retention (27 [32%] of 84 and nine [39%] of 23, respectively) than did the split-tip polyurethane hemodialysis catheter (two [1%] of 196; P <.001). Cuff retention rates among other catheter types compared with that of the polyurethane catheter were not significantly different. Duration of catheter dwell did not significantly influence cuff retention. Of 41 retained cuffs, three required removal with cutdown for cuff migration to the exit site, which inhibited healing (n = 1); for suspected infection (n = 1); or for cosmetic purposes as requested by the patient (n = 1). The remaining patients had no complications associated with cuff retention. CONCLUSION: Traction removal of smaller-bore silicone catheters is more likely to result in cuff retention than removal of larger silicone and polyurethane catheters, and cuff retention is usually inconsequential.