OBJECTIVES: This study reports quantitative comparisons of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) at 1.5 and 3 T from images of carotid atheroma obtained using a multicontrast, cardiac-gated, blood-suppressed fast spin echo protocol. METHODS: 18 subjects, with carotid atherosclerosis (>30% stenosis) confirmed on ultrasound, were imaged on both 1.5 and 3 T systems using phased-array coils with matched hardware specifications. T(1) weighted (T(1)W), T(2) weighted (T(2)W) and proton density-weighted (PDW) images were acquired with identical scan times. Multiple slices were prescribed to encompass both the carotid bifurcation and the plaque. Image quality was quantified using the SNR and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). A phantom experiment was also performed to validate the SNR method and confirm the size of the improvement in SNR. Comparisons of the SNR values from the vessel wall with muscle and plaque/lumen CNR measurements were performed at a patient level. To account for the multiple comparisons a Bonferroni correction was applied. RESULTS: One subject was excluded from the protocol owing to image quality and protocol failure. The mean improvement in SNR in plaque was 1.9, 2.1 and 2.1 in T(1)W, T(2)W and PDW images, respectively. All plaque SNR improvements were statistically significant at the p<0.05 level. The phantom experiment reported an improvement in SNR of 2.4 for PDW images. CONCLUSIONS: Significant gains in SNR can be obtained for carotid atheroma imaging at 3 T compared with 1.5 T. There was also a trend towards increased CNR. However, this was not significant after the application of the Bonferroni correction.
OBJECTIVES: This study reports quantitative comparisons of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) at 1.5 and 3 T from images of carotid atheroma obtained using a multicontrast, cardiac-gated, blood-suppressed fast spin echo protocol. METHODS: 18 subjects, with carotid atherosclerosis (>30% stenosis) confirmed on ultrasound, were imaged on both 1.5 and 3 T systems using phased-array coils with matched hardware specifications. T(1) weighted (T(1)W), T(2) weighted (T(2)W) and proton density-weighted (PDW) images were acquired with identical scan times. Multiple slices were prescribed to encompass both the carotid bifurcation and the plaque. Image quality was quantified using the SNR and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). A phantom experiment was also performed to validate the SNR method and confirm the size of the improvement in SNR. Comparisons of the SNR values from the vessel wall with muscle and plaque/lumen CNR measurements were performed at a patient level. To account for the multiple comparisons a Bonferroni correction was applied. RESULTS: One subject was excluded from the protocol owing to image quality and protocol failure. The mean improvement in SNR in plaque was 1.9, 2.1 and 2.1 in T(1)W, T(2)W and PDW images, respectively. All plaque SNR improvements were statistically significant at the p<0.05 level. The phantom experiment reported an improvement in SNR of 2.4 for PDW images. CONCLUSIONS: Significant gains in SNR can be obtained for carotid atheroma imaging at 3 T compared with 1.5 T. There was also a trend towards increased CNR. However, this was not significant after the application of the Bonferroni correction.
Authors: Ricardo C Cury; Stuart L Houser; Karen L Furie; James R Stone; Christopher S Ogilvy; Jane B Sherwood; James E Muller; Thomas J Brady; Denise P Hinton Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Vasily L Yarnykh; Masahiro Terashima; Cecil E Hayes; Ann Shimakawa; Norihide Takaya; Patricia K Nguyen; Jean H Brittain; Michael V McConnell; Chun Yuan Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Gareth J Adams; Jennifer Greene; G Wesley Vick; Ronald Harrist; Kay T Kimball; Christof Karmonik; Christie M Ballantyne; William Insull; Joel D Morrisett Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Norihide Takaya; Chun Yuan; Baocheng Chu; Tobias Saam; Nayak L Polissar; Gail P Jarvik; Carol Isaac; Judith McDonough; Cynthia Natiello; Randy Small; Marina S Ferguson; Thomas S Hatsukami Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-05-23 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jian-Ming Cai; Thomas S Hatsukami; Marina S Ferguson; Randy Small; Nayak L Polissar; Chun Yuan Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-09-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jianmin Yuan; Ammara Usman; Scott A Reid; Kevin F King; Andrew J Patterson; Jonathan H Gillard; Martin J Graves Journal: MAGMA Date: 2017-06-26 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Nicholas R Evans; Jason M Tarkin; Elizabeth Pv Le; Rouchelle S Sriranjan; Andrej Corovic; Elizabeth A Warburton; James Hf Rudd Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2020-04-03 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Chengcheng Zhu; Martin J Graves; Umar Sadat; Victoria E Young; Jonathan H Gillard; Andrew J Patterson Journal: Magn Reson Med Sci Date: 2015-11-06 Impact factor: 2.471