OBJECTIVES: The reproducibility of quantitative cerebral T2 relaxometry, diffusion tensor imaging, and H magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopic imaging was assessed on a clinical 3.0 T MR system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Repeated measurements in 10 healthy volunteers were used to establish the reproducibility of quantitative measures derived from different quantitative MR techniques, namely the T2 relaxation time, the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), the fractional anisotropy (FA), and metabolite concentrations of N-acetyl-aspartate (NAA), creatine (Cr), choline (Cho), and myo-inositol (mI). Results were compared with previously reported reproducibility measures from 1.5 T. RESULTS: The coefficient of variation (CV) was < or =1.6% for T2, < or =1.6% for ADC, and < or =5.3%, for FA in the cerebrum. For metabolites the CV was < or =8.0% in the frontal lobe and < or =20.4% in the temporal lobe. CONCLUSIONS: The reproducibility of quantitative brain MRI at 3.0 T is better than or at least comparable to the reproducibility at 1.5 T.
OBJECTIVES: The reproducibility of quantitative cerebral T2 relaxometry, diffusion tensor imaging, and H magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopic imaging was assessed on a clinical 3.0 T MR system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Repeated measurements in 10 healthy volunteers were used to establish the reproducibility of quantitative measures derived from different quantitative MR techniques, namely the T2 relaxation time, the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), the fractional anisotropy (FA), and metabolite concentrations of N-acetyl-aspartate (NAA), creatine (Cr), choline (Cho), and myo-inositol (mI). Results were compared with previously reported reproducibility measures from 1.5 T. RESULTS: The coefficient of variation (CV) was < or =1.6% for T2, < or =1.6% for ADC, and < or =5.3%, for FA in the cerebrum. For metabolites the CV was < or =8.0% in the frontal lobe and < or =20.4% in the temporal lobe. CONCLUSIONS: The reproducibility of quantitative brain MRI at 3.0 T is better than or at least comparable to the reproducibility at 1.5 T.
Authors: R J Fox; K Sakaie; J-C Lee; J P Debbins; Y Liu; D L Arnold; E R Melhem; C H Smith; M D Philips; M Lowe; E Fisher Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-12-15 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Benjamin M Ellingson; Albert Lai; Huytram N Nguyen; Phioanh L Nghiemphu; Whitney B Pope; Timothy F Cloughesy Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2015-04-21 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: E M Palacios; A J Martin; M A Boss; F Ezekiel; Y S Chang; E L Yuh; M J Vassar; D M Schnyer; C L MacDonald; K L Crawford; A Irimia; A W Toga; P Mukherjee Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-12-22 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: S M Wong; W H Backes; C E Zhang; J Staals; R J van Oostenbrugge; C R L P N Jeukens; J F A Jansen Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2017-12-07 Impact factor: 3.825