PURPOSE: To evaluate artifact sizes at 3 T compared to at 1.5 T, and to evaluate the influence of scanning parameters with respect to artifact size on a 3-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two aneurysm clips and five shunt valves were imaged in a water phantom at 1.5 and 3 T. At 3 T the influence of bandwidth (spin echo (SE) images) and echo time (gradient echo (GRE) images) on artifact size (area and extension in two orthogonal directions) was investigated. RESULTS: Artifact sizes increased substantially (typically 5-10 mm) at 3 T, compared to at 1.5 T, for implants entirely made of metallic materials, whereas the increase was the size less prominent (0-5 mm) for implants only partly containing metal. Artifact areas could be altered by changing the bandwidth or the echo time to about the same extent as it was affected by the increased field strength. CONCLUSION: Artifact sizes increase at 3 T, compared to at 1.5 T, depending on the type and composition of the implant, but can be substantially reduced by altering the imaging parameters. Optimization of imaging protocols to minimize artifacts is therefore important at higher field strengths. (c) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
PURPOSE: To evaluate artifact sizes at 3 T compared to at 1.5 T, and to evaluate the influence of scanning parameters with respect to artifact size on a 3-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two aneurysm clips and five shunt valves were imaged in a water phantom at 1.5 and 3 T. At 3 T the influence of bandwidth (spin echo (SE) images) and echo time (gradient echo (GRE) images) on artifact size (area and extension in two orthogonal directions) was investigated. RESULTS: Artifact sizes increased substantially (typically 5-10 mm) at 3 T, compared to at 1.5 T, for implants entirely made of metallic materials, whereas the increase was the size less prominent (0-5 mm) for implants only partly containing metal. Artifact areas could be altered by changing the bandwidth or the echo time to about the same extent as it was affected by the increased field strength. CONCLUSION: Artifact sizes increase at 3 T, compared to at 1.5 T, depending on the type and composition of the implant, but can be substantially reduced by altering the imaging parameters. Optimization of imaging protocols to minimize artifacts is therefore important at higher field strengths. (c) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: Andrea Lazik; Stefan Landgraeber; Patrick Schulte; Oliver Kraff; Thomas C Lauenstein; Jens M Theysohn Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2015-03-25 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Mary H Foltz; Robert M O'Leary; Diana Reader; Nicholas L Rudolph; Krista A Schlitter; Jutta Ellermann; Casey P Johnson; David W Polly; Arin M Ellingson Journal: Spine Deform Date: 2020-05-24
Authors: B Friedrich; M Wostrack; F Ringel; Y-M Ryang; A Förschler; S Waldt; C Zimmer; M Nittka; C Preibisch Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2014-08-01 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: Shairah Radzi; Gary Cowin; Mark Robinson; Jit Pratap; Andrew Volp; Michael A Schuetz; Beat Schmutz Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2014-06