Assessment of quiet T2 weighted PROPELLER sequence in pediatric abdominal imaging

Published:September 26, 2018DOI:


      • The Quiet T2 pulse sequence produced less acoustic noise than standard T2.
      • No difference in bile duct blurring, respiratory ghosting or pulsation
      • No difference in fat suppression or hepatic parenchymal depiction
      • Quiet T2 had more streak artifacts than standard T2.



      Elevated acoustic noise during Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) has been associated with patient anxiety and altered cochlear function. Acoustic Reduction Technique (ART) T2 weighted (T2w) periodically rotated overlapping parallel lines with enhanced reconstruction (PROPELLER) has been studied in brain MR but not abdominopelvic imaging. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the image quality and acoustic noise level of ART T2w PROPELLER sequence in comparison with the conventional T2w PROPELLER sequence in pediatric abdomino-pelvic imaging.


      Eleven consecutive pediatric patients undergoing abdomino-pelvic MRI were scanned on a 3 Tesla magnet using standard and ART T2w PROPELLER sequences. After scanning completion, objective sound level measurements were performed with a sound level meter and microphone. Mann-Whitney U test was used for a non-parametric two-tailed statistical analysis of acoustics, image rating and scan time with significance level set to 0.05. Overall inter-rater agreement was calculated using Cohen's kappa coefficient.


      Eleven pediatric patients (4 females and 7 males) between 26 days and 18 years of age (mean = 10.0, SD = 5.8) were included. ART T2w produced lower levels of acoustic noise than standard technique in a comparison of mean decibel readings from eleven trials of standard and ART T2w (p value = 0.00008). Streak artifacts were rated greater in ART T2w by both raters (p-value = 0.00278 and 0.00252). There was no significant difference in bile duct blurring, respiratory ghosting, pulsation, fat suppression or hepatic parenchymal depiction.


      Presence of additional streaking artifacts should be considered along with the benefit of reduced acoustic noise from ART T2w.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Clinical Imaging
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Corcuera-Solano I.
        • Doshi A.
        • Pawha P.S.
        • et al.
        ART PROPELLER MRI techniques match the quality of conventional PROPELLER brain imaging techniques.
        AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015; 36: 1124-1127
        • McJury M.
        • Shellock F.G.
        Auditory noise associated with MR procedures: a review.
        J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000; 12: 37-45
        • Brummett R.E.
        • Talbot J.M.
        • Charuhas P.
        Potential hearing loss resulting from MR imaging.
        Radiology. 1988; 169: 539-540
        • Marcar V.L.
        • Girard F.
        • Rinkel Y.
        • et al.
        Inaudible functional MRI using a truly mute gradient echo sequence.
        Neuroradiology. 2002; 44: 893-899
        • Radomskij P.
        • Schmidt M.A.
        • Heron C.W.
        • Prasher D.
        Effect of MRI noise on cochlear function.
        Lancet. 2002; 359: 1485
        • Alibek S.
        • Sedat A.
        • Mika V.
        • et al.
        Acoustic noise reduction in MRI using Silent Scan: an initial experience.
        Diagn Interv Radiol. 2014; 20: 360-363
        • Kim H.G.
        • et al.
        Image quality assessment of silent T2 PROPELLER sequence for brain imaging in infants.
        Br J Radiol. 2018; 91: 20170680
        • Edwards A.D.
        • Arthurs O.J.
        Paediatric MRI under sedation: is it necessary? What is the evidence for the alternatives?.
        Pediatr Radiol. 2011; 41: 1353-1364
        • Bayramoglu S.
        • et al.
        T2-weighted MRI of the upper abdomen: comparison of four fat-suppressed T2-weighted sequences including PROPELLER (BLADE) technique.
        . 2010; 17: 368-374
        • Dietrich M.
        • Ulbrich E.
        • Zanetti M.
        • et al.
        PROPELLER technique to improve image quality of MRI of the shoulder.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 197: 1093-1100
        • Hirokawa Y.
        • Isoda H.
        • Maetani Y.S.
        • et al.
        MRI artifact reduction and quality improvement in the upper abdomen with PROPELLER and prospective acquisition correction (PACE) technique.
        AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008; 191: 1154-1158
        • Fischer S.
        • et al.
        Quiet MR sequences in clinical routine: initial experience in abdominal imaging.
        Radiol Med. 2017; 122: 194-203
      1. “Mann-Whitney U Test Calculator.” Social Science Statistics, Accessed Oct. 22 2017.

      2. “QuickCalcs: Quantify interrater agreement with kappa.” GraphPad Software, Accesses Oct. 22 2017.

        • Mansfield P.
        • et al.
        Active acoustic screening: design principles for quiet gradient coils in MRI.
        Magn Reson Med. 1994; 33: 276-281
        • Pierre E.Y.
        • et al.
        Parallel imaging-based reduction of acoustic noise for clinical magnetic resonance imaging.
        Invest Radiol. 2014; 49: 620-606
        • Hirokawa Y.
        • et al.
        Evaluation of motion correction effect and image quality with the periodically rotated overlapping parallel lines with enhanced reconstruction (PROPELLER) (BLADE) and parallel imaging acquisition technique in the upper abdomen.
        J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008; 28: 957-962
        • Pandit P.
        • Qi Y.
        • Story J.
        • et al.
        Multishot PROPELLER for high-field preclinical MRI.
        Magn Reson Med. 2010; 64: 47-53
        • Chen B.
        • Hsu E.W.
        Noise removal in magnetic resonance diffusion tensor imaging.
        Magn Reson Med. 2005; 54: 393-401