INTRODUCTION: Higher magnetic fields (>or=3 T) afford higher spatial and/or temporal resolution in MR imaging with contrast agents, however, studies containing direct comparisons of signal intensity among different magnetic fields are substantially sparse. Our aim was to quantify the differences in terms of signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) between higher and lower (<or=1.5 T) magnetic fields and to clarify the benefit of higher magnetic fields. METHODS: The same sets of phantom experiments were conducted at both 4 and 1.5 T on whole-body MR scanners with head coils. Phantoms included different concentrations of Gd chelate water solution. A standard contrast-enhanced MR angiographic sequence with the same imaging parameters was utilized to confirm changes in signal intensities. Furthermore, the results were compared with a computer simulation. RESULTS: Peak SNRs at 4 T increased at least 2.21 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T. Moreover, peak CNRs at 4 T increased at least 1.59 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T in the range of Gd concentration expected during clinical use. CONCLUSION: Higher magnetic fields benefit CNRs as well as SNRs. These advantages may lead to a high resolution imaging and reduction of scan time.
INTRODUCTION: Higher magnetic fields (>or=3 T) afford higher spatial and/or temporal resolution in MR imaging with contrast agents, however, studies containing direct comparisons of signal intensity among different magnetic fields are substantially sparse. Our aim was to quantify the differences in terms of signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) between higher and lower (<or=1.5 T) magnetic fields and to clarify the benefit of higher magnetic fields. METHODS: The same sets of phantom experiments were conducted at both 4 and 1.5 T on whole-body MR scanners with head coils. Phantoms included different concentrations of Gd chelate water solution. A standard contrast-enhanced MR angiographic sequence with the same imaging parameters was utilized to confirm changes in signal intensities. Furthermore, the results were compared with a computer simulation. RESULTS: Peak SNRs at 4 T increased at least 2.21 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T. Moreover, peak CNRs at 4 T increased at least 1.59 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T in the range of Gd concentration expected during clinical use. CONCLUSION: Higher magnetic fields benefit CNRs as well as SNRs. These advantages may lead to a high resolution imaging and reduction of scan time.