Literature DB >> 11432577

Magnetic resonance angiography at 3.0 Tesla: initial clinical experience.

N G Campeau1, J Huston, M A Bernstein, C Lin, G F Gibbs.   

Abstract

Magnetic resonance (MR) angiography has undergone significant development over the past decade. It has gone from being a novelty application of MR with limited clinical use to replacing catheter angiography in some clinical applications. One of the principal limitations inherent to all MR angiographic techniques is that they remain signal limited when pushed to the limits of higher resolution and short acquisition time. Developments in magnetic gradient hardware, coil design, and pulse sequences now are well optimized for MR angiography obtained at 1.5-T main magnetic field (B-field) strength, with acquisition times and imaging matrix size near their optimal limits, respectively. Recently, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved use of clinical magnetic resonance imaging with main magnetic field strengths of up to 4 T. Before FDA approval, use of MR with magnetic field strengths much greater than 1.5 T was essentially reserved for investigational or research applications. The main advantage of high B-field imaging is a significant improvement in the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), which increases in an approximately linear fashion with field strength in the range of 1.5 to 3.0 T. This increased SNR is directly available when performing MR angiographic acquisitions at higher magnetic field strengths, allowing for better resolution and conspicuity of vessels with similar acquisition times. Little has been reported on the benefits of performing MR angiography at magnetic field strengths >1.5 T. The purpose of this article is to summarize our current experience with intracranial and cervical MR angiographic techniques at 3.0 T.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11432577     DOI: 10.1097/00002142-200106000-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Top Magn Reson Imaging        ISSN: 0899-3459


  16 in total

Review 1.  Acoustic noise concerns in functional magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Adriaan Moelker; Peter M T Pattynama
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.038

Review 2.  [Clinical MR at 3 Tesla: current status].

Authors:  K T Baudendistel; J T Heverhagen; M V Knopp
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 0.635

3.  Advantages and pitfalls in 3T MR brain imaging: a pictorial review.

Authors:  Bernd L Schmitz; Andrik J Aschoff; Martin H K Hoffmann; Georg Grön
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  Visualization of intrarenal vessels by 3.0-T MR angiography in comparison with digital subtraction angiography using renal specimens.

Authors:  Jens-Peter Schenk; Björn Friebe; Sebastian Ley; Klaus Baudendistel; Max Schoebinger; Stefan Hähnel; Arianeb Mehrabi; Jochen Tröger; Peter Hallscheidt
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2006-08-09

Review 5.  13C imaging-a new diagnostic platform.

Authors:  Sven Månsson; Edvin Johansson; Peter Magnusson; Chun-Ming Chai; Georg Hansson; J Stefan Petersson; Freddy Ståhlberg; Klaes Golman
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-06-14       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  MRA of abdominal vessels: technical advances.

Authors:  Henrik J Michaely; Olaf Dietrich; Kambiz Nael; Sabine Weckbach; Maximilian F Reiser; Stefan O Schoenberg
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-05-24       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Intracranial contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance venography with 6.4-fold sensitivity encoding at 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla.

Authors:  Houchun H Hu; Clifton R Haider; Norbert G Campeau; John Huston; Stephen J Riederer
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 4.813

8.  A comparative study at 3 T of sequence dependence of T2 quantitation in the knee.

Authors:  Alex Pai; Xiaojuan Li; Sharmila Majumdar
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2008-05-23       Impact factor: 2.546

9.  Image-guided radio-frequency gain calibration for high-field MRI.

Authors:  Elodie Breton; Kellyanne McGorty; Graham C Wiggins; Leon Axel; Daniel Kim
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 4.044

10.  Molecular imaging with endogenous substances.

Authors:  Klaes Golman; Jan H Ardenkjaer-Larsen; J Stefan Petersson; Sven Mansson; Ib Leunbach
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-08-20       Impact factor: 11.205

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.