PURPOSE: To evaluate the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), precision, and accuracy of phase-contrast flow measurements at 3 T with the help of an in vitro model and to compare the results with data from two 1.5-T scanners. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using an identical setup of a laminar flow model and sequence parameters, measurements were done at one 3-T and at two 1.5-T systems. Precision, accuracy, and SNR were obtained for velocity encodings ranging from 55 up to 550 cm(-1). SNRs were calculated from the magnitude as well as the flow encoded images. RESULTS: Precision and accuracy for the in vitro flow model were similarly high in all scanners with no significant difference. For velocity encodings from 55 cm(-1) up to 550 cm(-1), the SNR in magnitude as well as phase encoded images of the 3-T measurements was approximately 2.5 times higher than the SNR obtained from the two 1.5-T systems. CONCLUSION: Even without optimization for the 3-T environment, flow measurements show the same high accuracy and precision as is known from clinical 1.5-T scanners. The superior SNR at 3 T will allow further improvements in temporal and spatial resolution. This will be of interest for small-size vessels like coronary arteries or for slow diastolic flow patterns.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), precision, and accuracy of phase-contrast flow measurements at 3 T with the help of an in vitro model and to compare the results with data from two 1.5-T scanners. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using an identical setup of a laminar flow model and sequence parameters, measurements were done at one 3-T and at two 1.5-T systems. Precision, accuracy, and SNR were obtained for velocity encodings ranging from 55 up to 550 cm(-1). SNRs were calculated from the magnitude as well as the flow encoded images. RESULTS: Precision and accuracy for the in vitro flow model were similarly high in all scanners with no significant difference. For velocity encodings from 55 cm(-1) up to 550 cm(-1), the SNR in magnitude as well as phase encoded images of the 3-T measurements was approximately 2.5 times higher than the SNR obtained from the two 1.5-T systems. CONCLUSION: Even without optimization for the 3-T environment, flow measurements show the same high accuracy and precision as is known from clinical 1.5-T scanners. The superior SNR at 3 T will allow further improvements in temporal and spatial resolution. This will be of interest for small-size vessels like coronary arteries or for slow diastolic flow patterns.
Authors: Fabian Rengier; Michael Delles; Roland Unterhinninghofen; Sebastian Ley; Matthias Müller-Eschner; Sasan Partovi; Philipp Geisbüsch; Rüdiger Dillmann; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Hendrik von Tengg-Kobligk Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-02-24 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Alex Frydrychowicz; Thorsten A Bley; Jan T Winterer; Andreas Harloff; Mathias Langer; Jürgen Hennig; Michael Markl Journal: MAGMA Date: 2006-08-26 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Andreas Harloff; Timo Zech; Alex Frydrychowicz; Martin Schumacher; Joachim Schöllhorn; Jürgen Hennig; Cornelius Weiller; Michael Markl Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2009-02-13 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Anne Brandts; Stijntje D Roes; Joost Doornbos; Robert G Weiss; Albert de Roos; Matthias Stuber; Jos J M Westenberg Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Benjamin E Northrup; Kyle S McCommis; Haosen Zhang; Shuddhadeb Ray; Pamela K Woodard; Robert J Gropler; Jie Zheng Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2008-11-17 Impact factor: 5.364