PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate the feasibility, image quality, and accuracy of coronary magnetic resonance (MR) angiography at 3.0 T in patients suspected of having coronary artery disease and to prospectively compare these results with those of coronary MR angiography performed at 1.5 T. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was approved by the institutional review board, and informed consent was obtained from all patients. Eighteen patients (11 men, seven women; mean age, 63 years; age range, 45-76 years) suspected of having coronary artery disease who were scheduled to undergo elective conventional coronary angiography (reference standard) were included. For coronary MR angiography at 3.0 and 1.5 T, a vector electrocardiographically gated three-dimensional segmented k-space gradient-echo imaging sequence was combined with real-time respiratory navigator gating and tracking. Signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs), scores of image quality and sensitivity and specificity for the detection of coronary artery stenosis on a segment-by-segment basis were assessed at 3.0 and 1.5 T. Data were analyzed for statistical differences by using the Wilcoxon matched-pairs test and the McNemar test. RESULTS: The average increase in SNR at 3.0 T with respect to that at 1.5 T was 29.5% for the left coronary artery (LCA) and 31.2% for the right coronary artery (RCA) (P < .001), and the average increase in CNR was 21.8% for the LCA and 23.5% for the RCA (P < .001). Scores of image quality (P = .77) and diagnostic accuracy for the detection of coronary artery stenoses (sensitivity and specificity: 82% and 89%, respectively, at 3.0 T vs 82% and 88% at 1.5 T; P > .99) were identical or almost identical at both field strengths. CONCLUSION: Coronary MR angiography at 3.0 T is feasible in patients suspected of having coronary artery disease and yields significant increases in SNR and CNR, although current techniques do not result in significantly improved image quality and diagnostic accuracy compared with the quality and accuracy at 1.5 T. (c) RSNA, 2005.
PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate the feasibility, image quality, and accuracy of coronary magnetic resonance (MR) angiography at 3.0 T in patients suspected of having coronary artery disease and to prospectively compare these results with those of coronary MR angiography performed at 1.5 T. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was approved by the institutional review board, and informed consent was obtained from all patients. Eighteen patients (11 men, seven women; mean age, 63 years; age range, 45-76 years) suspected of having coronary artery disease who were scheduled to undergo elective conventional coronary angiography (reference standard) were included. For coronary MR angiography at 3.0 and 1.5 T, a vector electrocardiographically gated three-dimensional segmented k-space gradient-echo imaging sequence was combined with real-time respiratory navigator gating and tracking. Signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs), scores of image quality and sensitivity and specificity for the detection of coronary artery stenosis on a segment-by-segment basis were assessed at 3.0 and 1.5 T. Data were analyzed for statistical differences by using the Wilcoxon matched-pairs test and the McNemar test. RESULTS: The average increase in SNR at 3.0 T with respect to that at 1.5 T was 29.5% for the left coronary artery (LCA) and 31.2% for the right coronary artery (RCA) (P < .001), and the average increase in CNR was 21.8% for the LCA and 23.5% for the RCA (P < .001). Scores of image quality (P = .77) and diagnostic accuracy for the detection of coronary artery stenoses (sensitivity and specificity: 82% and 89%, respectively, at 3.0 T vs 82% and 88% at 1.5 T; P > .99) were identical or almost identical at both field strengths. CONCLUSION: Coronary MR angiography at 3.0 T is feasible in patients suspected of having coronary artery disease and yields significant increases in SNR and CNR, although current techniques do not result in significantly improved image quality and diagnostic accuracy compared with the quality and accuracy at 1.5 T. (c) RSNA, 2005.
Authors: Ahmed M Gharib; Daniel A Herzka; Ali O Ustun; Milind Y Desai; Julia Locklin; Roderic I Pettigrew; Matthias Stuber Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Carsten Meyer; Katharina Strach; Daniel Thomas; Harold Litt; Claas P Nähle; Klaus Tiemann; Ulrich Schwenger; Hans H Schild; Torsten Sommer Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2007-09-13 Impact factor: 5.315