Literature DB >> 18463874

Comparison of image quality in magnetic resonance imaging of the knee at 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla using 32-channel receiver coils.

F Schoth1, N Kraemer, T Niendorf, C Hohl, R W Gunther, G A Krombach.   

Abstract

We examined to what degree the visualization of anatomic structures in the human knee is improved using 3.0-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and many element RF receive coils as compared to 1.5 T. We imaged 20 knees at 1.5 and 3.0 T using T2-weighted STIR, T2-weighted gradient echo, T1-weighted spin-echo, true-FISP and T2-weighted fast spin echo techniques in conjunction with 32-element RF coil arrays. The 3.0-T examination was considerably faster than its 1.5-T counterpart. A superior subjective visibility at 3.0 T vs 1.5 T was found in 27 of 50 evaluated structures (meniscus, ligaments) with the exception of true-FISP techniques. The 3.0-T examination provided a better visibility (evaluated by blinded consensus-reading by two radiologists) of small structures such as the ligamentum transversum genu. Also, cartilage was better delineated at 3.0 T. A 23% increased average signal-to-noise ratio as assessed using a temporal filter was observed at 3.0 T as compared to 1.5 T. At 3.0 T, imaging of the human knee is faster and results in a subjective visibility of anatomic structures that is superior to and competitive with 1.5 T.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18463874     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-008-0972-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  17 in total

1.  High-resolution MR imaging of the knee at 3 T.

Authors:  M Niitsu; T Nakai; K Ikeda; G Y Tang; H Yoshioka; Y Itai
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 1.990

2.  Musculoskeletal MRI at 3.0 T: relaxation times and image contrast.

Authors:  Garry E Gold; Eric Han; Jeff Stainsby; Graham Wright; Jean Brittain; Christopher Beaulieu
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  MR diagnosis of meniscal tears of the knee: analysis of error patterns.

Authors:  Pieter Van Dyck; Jan Gielen; Jan D'Anvers; Filip Vanhoenacker; Lieven Dossche; Jozef Van Gestel; Paul M Parizel
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2007-04-14       Impact factor: 3.067

4.  Articular cartilage of the knee: rapid three-dimensional MR imaging at 3.0 T with IDEAL balanced steady-state free precession--initial experience.

Authors:  Garry E Gold; Scott B Reeder; Huanzhou Yu; Peter Kornaat; Ann S Shimakawa; Jane W Johnson; Norbert J Pelc; Christopher F Beaulieu; Jean H Brittain
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2006-06-26       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Sensitivity of routine 1.0-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging versus arthroscopy as gold standard in fresh traumatic chondral lesions of the knee in young adults.

Authors:  Paavo-Ilari Kuikka; Martti J Kiuru; Maria H Niva; Heikki Kröger; Harri K Pihlajamäki
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 4.772

6.  Signal-to-noise measures for magnetic resonance imagers.

Authors:  B W Murphy; P L Carson; J H Ellis; Y T Zhang; R J Hyde; T L Chenevert
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 2.546

7.  MR imaging of articular cartilage at 1.5T and 3.0T: comparison of SPGR and SSFP sequences.

Authors:  P R Kornaat; S B Reeder; S Koo; J H Brittain; H Yu; T P Andriacchi; G E Gold
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 6.576

8.  MRI-negative bucket-handle tears of the lateral meniscus in athletes: a case series.

Authors:  Michael Makdissi; Karl O Eriksson; Hayden G Morris; David A Young
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2005-11-26       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 9.  Evaluation of acute knee pain in primary care.

Authors:  Jeffrey L Jackson; Patrick G O'Malley; Kurt Kroenke
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2003-10-07       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Accuracy of magnetic resonance in identifying traumatic intraarticular knee lesions.

Authors:  Carlos Eduardo Sanches Vaz; Olavo Pires de Camargo; Paulo José de Santana; Antonio Carlos Valezi
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2005-12-12       Impact factor: 2.365

View more
  8 in total

1.  Potential impact of a 32-channel receiving head coil technology on the results of a functional MRI paradigm.

Authors:  J Albrecht; M Burke; K Haegler; V Schöpf; A M Kleemann; M Paolini; M Wiesmann; J Linn
Journal:  Clin Neuroradiol       Date:  2010-09-21       Impact factor: 3.649

Review 2.  Musculoskeletal imaging: current and future trends.

Authors:  Hassan Douis; Steven L J James; A Mark Davies
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-12-22       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the knee: optimizing 3 Tesla imaging.

Authors:  Lauren Shapiro; Ernesto Staroswiecki; Garry Gold
Journal:  Semin Roentgenol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 0.800

4.  The anterolateral ligament of the knee is not a solid structure in human fetuses.

Authors:  Fernanda Vieira Botelho Delpupo; Juliana Hott de Fúcio Lizardo; Josemberg da Silva Baptista
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2021-01-08       Impact factor: 1.246

Review 5.  Cartilage repair and joint preservation: medical and surgical treatment options.

Authors:  Henning Madry; Ulrich Wolfgang Grün; Gunnar Knutsen
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2011-10-07       Impact factor: 5.594

6.  Arthroscopic all-inside meniscal repair--Does the meniscus heal? A clinical and radiological follow-up examination to verify meniscal healing using a 3-T MRI.

Authors:  Thomas Hoffelner; Herbert Resch; Rosemarie Forstner; Mayer Michael; Bernd Minnich; Mark Tauber
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2010-07-01       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Comparative study of imaging at 3.0 T versus 1.5 T of the knee.

Authors:  Scott Wong; Lynne Steinbach; Jian Zhao; Christoph Stehling; C Benjamin Ma; Thomas M Link
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2009-04-07       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Traumatic Meniscus and Cruciate Ligament Tears in Young Patients: A Comparison of 3T Versus 1.5T MRI.

Authors:  Nasreddine Nouri; Mouna Chelli Bouaziz; Hend Riahi; Meriem Mechri; Abdelhakim Kherfani; Moez Ouertatani; Mohamed Fethi Ladeb
Journal:  J Belg Soc Radiol       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 1.894

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.