OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the applicability of high magnetic field strengths for comprehensive functional and structural cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eighteen subjects underwent comprehensive cardiac MRI at 1.5 T and 3.0 T. The following imaging techniques were implemented: double and triple inversion prepared FSE for anatomic imaging, 4 different sets of echocardiographic-gated CINE strategies for functional and flow imaging, inversion prepared gradient echo for delayed enhancement imaging, T1-weighted segmented EPI for perfusion imaging and 2-dimensional (2-D) spiral, and volumetric SSFP for coronary artery imaging. RESULTS: : Use of 3 Tesla as opposed to 1.5 Tesla provided substantial baseline signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) improvements for anatomic (T1-weighted double IR: DeltaSNR = 29%, DeltaCNR = 20%, T2-weighted double IR: DeltaSNR = 39%, DeltaCNR = 33%, triple IR: DeltaSNR = 74%, DeltaCNR = 60%), functional (conventional CINE: DeltaSNR = 123%, DeltaCNR = 74%, accelerated CINE: DeltaSNR = 161%, DeltaCNR = 86%), myocardial tagging (DeltaSNRsystole = 54%, DeltaCNRsystole = 176%), phase contrast flow measurements (DeltaSNR = 79%), viability (DeltaSNR = 48%, DeltaCNR = 40%), perfusion (DeltaSNR = 109%, DeltaCNR = 87%), and breathhold coronary imaging (2-D spiral: DeltaSNRRCA = 54%, DeltaCNRRCA = 69%, 3-D SSFP: DeltaSNRRCA = 60%, DeltaCNRRCA = 126%), but also revealed image quality issues, which were successfully tackled by adiabatic radiofrequency pulses and parallel imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac MRI at 3.0 T is feasible for the comprehensive assessment of cardiac morphology and function, although SAR limitations and susceptibility effects remain a concern. The need for speed together with the SNR benefit at 3.0 T will motivate further advances in routine cardiac MRI while providing an image-quality advantage over imaging at 1.5 Tesla.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the applicability of high magnetic field strengths for comprehensive functional and structural cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eighteen subjects underwent comprehensive cardiac MRI at 1.5 T and 3.0 T. The following imaging techniques were implemented: double and triple inversion prepared FSE for anatomic imaging, 4 different sets of echocardiographic-gated CINE strategies for functional and flow imaging, inversion prepared gradient echo for delayed enhancement imaging, T1-weighted segmented EPI for perfusion imaging and 2-dimensional (2-D) spiral, and volumetric SSFP for coronary artery imaging. RESULTS: : Use of 3 Tesla as opposed to 1.5 Tesla provided substantial baseline signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) improvements for anatomic (T1-weighted double IR: DeltaSNR = 29%, DeltaCNR = 20%, T2-weighted double IR: DeltaSNR = 39%, DeltaCNR = 33%, triple IR: DeltaSNR = 74%, DeltaCNR = 60%), functional (conventional CINE: DeltaSNR = 123%, DeltaCNR = 74%, accelerated CINE: DeltaSNR = 161%, DeltaCNR = 86%), myocardial tagging (DeltaSNRsystole = 54%, DeltaCNRsystole = 176%), phase contrast flow measurements (DeltaSNR = 79%), viability (DeltaSNR = 48%, DeltaCNR = 40%), perfusion (DeltaSNR = 109%, DeltaCNR = 87%), and breathhold coronary imaging (2-D spiral: DeltaSNRRCA = 54%, DeltaCNRRCA = 69%, 3-D SSFP: DeltaSNRRCA = 60%, DeltaCNRRCA = 126%), but also revealed image quality issues, which were successfully tackled by adiabatic radiofrequency pulses and parallel imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac MRI at 3.0 T is feasible for the comprehensive assessment of cardiac morphology and function, although SAR limitations and susceptibility effects remain a concern. The need for speed together with the SNR benefit at 3.0 T will motivate further advances in routine cardiac MRI while providing an image-quality advantage over imaging at 1.5 Tesla.
Authors: Bernhard D Klumpp; Joern Sandstede; Klaus P Lodemann; Achim Seeger; Tobias Hoevelborn; Michael Fenchel; Ulrich Kramer; Claus D Claussen; Stephan Miller Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2008-12-18 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Torleif A Sandner; Philip Houck; Val M Runge; Spencer Sincleair; Armin M Huber; Daniel Theisen; Maximilian F Reiser; Bernd J Wintersperger Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2008-05-08 Impact factor: 5.315