Literature DB >> 17893053

Liver MR imaging: 1.5T versus 3T.

Miguel Ramalho1, Ersan Altun, Vasco Herédia, Mauricio Zapparoli, Richard Semelka.   

Abstract

This article focuses on technical challenges in transferring 1.5T liver protocols to 3T systems and the overall comparison of MR sequences, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of imaging at the higher field strength. An important benefit is the capacity of acquiring high-quality, thin-section postgadolinium T1-weighted three-dimensional gradientecho sequences, most clinically relevant for the detection and characterization of small hypervascular malignant diseases. Further research and development is necessary to overcome disadvantages, such as with in- and out-of phase T1-weighted gradient-echo sequences, and to minimize artifacts that appear at 3T.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17893053     DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2007.06.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am        ISSN: 1064-9689            Impact factor:   2.266


  15 in total

1.  Small (≤ 2 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic liver disease: comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0 T MRI and multiphasic 64-multirow detector CT.

Authors:  J Hwang; S H Kim; M W Lee; J Y Lee
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-12-13       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Renal imaging at 7 Tesla: preliminary results.

Authors:  Lale Umutlu; Stephan Orzada; Sonja Kinner; Stefan Maderwald; Irina Brote; Andreas K Bitz; Oliver Kraff; Susanne C Ladd; Gerald Antoch; Mark E Ladd; Harald H Quick; Thomas C Lauenstein
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-09-25       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging: A new standard in liver imaging?

Authors:  Rossano Girometti
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2015-07-28

4.  Hepatic fat assessment using advanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Yong Pang; Baiying Yu; Xiaoliang Zhang
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2012-09

Review 5.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Liver (Including Biliary Contrast Agents) Part 1: Technical Considerations and Contrast Materials.

Authors:  A Agostini; M F Kircher; R Do; A Borgheresi; S Monti; A Giovagnoni; L Mannelli
Journal:  Semin Roentgenol       Date:  2016-05-30       Impact factor: 0.800

6.  Comparison of gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced computed tomography with histopathological examinations for the identification of hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter phase III study.

Authors:  Masakatsu Tsurusaki; Keitaro Sofue; Hiroyoshi Isoda; Masahiro Okada; Kazuhiro Kitajima; Takamichi Murakami
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 7.527

7.  Numerical Analysis of Human Sample Effect on RF Penetration and Liver MR Imaging at Ultrahigh Field.

Authors:  Yong Pang; Bing Wu; Chunsheng Wang; Daniel B Vigneron; Xiaoliang Zhang
Journal:  Concepts Magn Reson Part B Magn Reson Eng       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.176

Review 8.  Importance of imaging and recent developments in diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

Authors:  Mustafa Koplay; Mesut Sivri; Hasan Erdogan; Alaaddin Nayman
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2015-04-18

9.  [Value of magnetic resonance imaging in diffuse liver diseases].

Authors:  N Schramm; M D'Anastasi; M F Reiser; C J Zech
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 10.  Focal liver lesions: Practical magnetic resonance imaging approach.

Authors:  António P Matos; Fernanda Velloni; Miguel Ramalho; Mamdoh AlObaidy; Aruna Rajapaksha; Richard C Semelka
Journal:  World J Hepatol       Date:  2015-08-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.