Literature DB >> 2272012

Effect of field strength on susceptibility artifacts in magnetic resonance imaging.

K Farahani1, U Sinha, S Sinha, L C Chiu, R B Lufkin.   

Abstract

In magnetic resonance imaging susceptibility artifacts occur at the interface of substances with large magnetic susceptibility differences, resulting in geometric distortions of the image at those boundaries. The susceptibility artifacts are often subtle on clinical images and if not carefully examined they may lead to misdiagnosis. Magnetic susceptibility artifacts are prevalent on the boundary of air-containing paranasal sinuses, as well as bone-soft tissue interfaces in the spinal canal. The appearance of these artifacts on images from three different magnetic field strength instruments, 0.3, 0.5, and 1.5 Tesla were studied. T1- and T2-weighted spin echo and gradient recalled echo pulse sequences were selected to image a water phantom containing substances of varying susceptibilities. The effects were also studied in MR images of the head in a normal human volunteer. At any given field strength the artifacts were more prominent in the gradient echo imaging than in the corresponding spin echo pulse sequence. As expected, the distortions were also greater at higher field strengths. The results in human subjects paralleled the findings in the phantom study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2272012     DOI: 10.1016/0895-6111(90)90040-i

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Comput Med Imaging Graph        ISSN: 0895-6111            Impact factor:   4.790


  25 in total

Review 1.  An illustrative review to understand and manage metal-induced artifacts in musculoskeletal MRI: a primer and updates.

Authors:  J P Dillenseger; S Molière; P Choquet; C Goetz; M Ehlinger; G Bierry
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2016-02-02       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  SPIO-labeled Yttrium Microspheres for MR Imaging Quantification of Transcatheter Intrahepatic Delivery in a Rodent Model.

Authors:  Weiguo Li; Zhuoli Zhang; Andrew C Gordon; Jeane Chen; Jodi Nicolai; Robert J Lewandowski; Reed A Omary; Andrew C Larson
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-08-27       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 3.  Imaging near orthopedic hardware.

Authors:  Matthew F Koff; Alissa J Burge; Kevin M Koch; Hollis G Potter
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2017-02-02       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Large field of view distortion assessment in a low-field MR-linac.

Authors:  Siamak P Nejad-Davarani; Joshua P Kim; Dongsu Du; Carri Glide-Hurst
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-03-23       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Ultrahigh field MR Neuroimaging.

Authors:  Gaurav Verma; Priti Balchandani
Journal:  Top Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-06

6.  Consensus recommendations on standardized magnetic resonance imaging protocols for multicenter canine brain tumor clinical trials.

Authors:  Rebecca A Packer; John H Rossmeisl; Michael S Kent; John F Griffin; Christina Mazcko; Amy K LeBlanc
Journal:  Vet Radiol Ultrasound       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 1.363

7.  MRI of Hip Arthroplasties: Comparison of Isotropic Multiacquisition Variable-Resonance Image Combination Selective (MAVRIC SL) Acquisitions With a Conventional MAVRIC SL Acquisition.

Authors:  Kelly C Zochowski; Mauro A Miranda; Jacky Cheung; Erin C Argentieri; Bin Lin; S Sivaram Kaushik; Alissa J Burge; Hollis G Potter; Matthew F Koff
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2019-08-15       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Comparison of 1.5 and 3.0 T for contrast-enhanced pulmonary magnetic resonance angiography.

Authors:  Frank Joseph Londy; Suzan Lowe; Paul D Stein; John G Weg; Robert L Eisner; Kenneth V Leeper; Pamela K Woodard; H Dirk Sostman; Kathleen A Jablonski; Sarah E Fowler; Charles A Hales; Russell D Hull; Alexander Gottschalk; David P Naidich; Thomas L Chenevert
Journal:  Clin Appl Thromb Hemost       Date:  2011-10-12       Impact factor: 2.389

Review 9.  Imaging of musculoskeletal soft tissue infections.

Authors:  Marcin B Turecki; Mihra S Taljanovic; Alana Y Stubbs; Anna R Graham; Dean A Holden; Tim B Hunter; Lee F Rogers
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2009-08-28       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 10.  Clinical magnetic resonance imaging of arthroplasty at 1.5 T.

Authors:  Matthew F Koff; Alissa J Burge; Hollis G Potter
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2020-02-04       Impact factor: 3.494

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.