Skip to main content
Insights into Imaging

Table 3 Comparison of image quality between conventional and synthetic T2WI

From: A preliminary study of synthetic magnetic resonance imaging in rectal cancer: imaging quality and preoperative assessment

 

Conventional T2WI

Synthetic T2WI

P value

SNR

   

Observer 1

29.70 ± 12.17

26.85 (18.33, 41.24)

0.978

Observer 2

29.14 ± 11.94

25.85 (19.11, 41.06)

0.717

CNR

   

Observer 1

5.41 (2.00, 9.67)

5.66 (2.89, 11.71)

0.145

Observer 2

4.99 (2.39, 9.37)

5.27 (3.10, 11.84)

0.058

Overall image quality

   

Observer 1

4.63 ± 0.53

4.60 ± 0.54

0.592

Observer 2

4.64 ± 0.51

4.57 ± 0.54

0.239

Lesion conspicuity

   

Observer 1

4.69 ± 0.53

4.71 ± 0.52

0.617

Observer 2

4.65 ± 0.56

4.66 ± 0.54

0.808

Sharpness of the lesion edge

   

Observer 1

4.59 ± 0.50

4.69 ± 0.46

0.018*

Observer 2

4.64 ± 0.51

4.71 ± 0.46

0.127

Absence of motion artifacts

   

Observer 1

4.68 ± 0.53

4.56 ± 0.58

0.069

Observer 2

4.64 ± 0.55

4.53 ± 0.58

0.112

  1. SNR and CNR following the normal distribution are expressed as mean ± standard deviation; otherwise, expressed as median (first quartile, third quartile). The subject image scores are expressed as means ± standard deviations
  2. SNR, signal-to-noise ratio; CNR, contrast-to-noise ratio
  3. *p < 0.05
Back to article page