OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of magnetic field heterogeneity in breast dynamic contrast-enhanced examinations with fat saturation (DCE-FS). METHODS: The magnetic field was mapped over the breasts in ten patients. DCE-FS was undertaken at 1.5 T with fast spoiled gradient echoes and spectrally selective fat saturation. Signal intensity was calculated for T1 values 25-1,200 ms both on and off resonance, and results were verified with a test object. Clinical examinations were evaluated for the predicted effects of field heterogeneity. RESULTS: Magnetic field was found to vary by 3.6 ± 1.2 ppm over the central transaxial slice and 5.1 ± 1.5 over the whole breast volume (mean ± standard deviation). Computer simulations predict a reduction in the dynamic range if field heterogeneity leads to unintended water suppression, and distortion to CA uptake curves due to fat suppression failure (for fat containing pixels). A compromise between dynamic range and fat saturation performance is required. Both water suppression and fat suppression failure are apparent in clinical examinations. CONCLUSION: Magnetic field heterogeneity is likely to reduce the sensitivity of DCE-FS by distorting the CA uptake curves because of fat suppression failure (for fat containing pixels) and by reducing the dynamic range because of unintended water suppression. KEY POINTS: • Magnetic field heterogeneity is significant in breast magnetic resonance. • Contrast-agent uptake curves are distorted by a non-uniform magnetic field. • Radiologist must be aware of possibility of distortion to interpret uptake curves correctly. • Compromise between fat suppression and dynamic range is required.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of magnetic field heterogeneity in breast dynamic contrast-enhanced examinations with fat saturation (DCE-FS). METHODS: The magnetic field was mapped over the breasts in ten patients. DCE-FS was undertaken at 1.5 T with fast spoiled gradient echoes and spectrally selective fat saturation. Signal intensity was calculated for T1 values 25-1,200 ms both on and off resonance, and results were verified with a test object. Clinical examinations were evaluated for the predicted effects of field heterogeneity. RESULTS: Magnetic field was found to vary by 3.6 ± 1.2 ppm over the central transaxial slice and 5.1 ± 1.5 over the whole breast volume (mean ± standard deviation). Computer simulations predict a reduction in the dynamic range if field heterogeneity leads to unintended water suppression, and distortion to CA uptake curves due to fat suppression failure (for fat containing pixels). A compromise between dynamic range and fat saturation performance is required. Both water suppression and fat suppression failure are apparent in clinical examinations. CONCLUSION: Magnetic field heterogeneity is likely to reduce the sensitivity of DCE-FS by distorting the CA uptake curves because of fat suppression failure (for fat containing pixels) and by reducing the dynamic range because of unintended water suppression. KEY POINTS: • Magnetic field heterogeneity is significant in breast magnetic resonance. • Contrast-agent uptake curves are distorted by a non-uniform magnetic field. • Radiologist must be aware of possibility of distortion to interpret uptake curves correctly. • Compromise between fat suppression and dynamic range is required.
Authors: Huong T Le-Petross; Gary J Whitman; Deanne P Atchley; Ying Yuan; Angelica Gutierrez-Barrera; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Jennifer K Litton; Banu K Arun Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-03-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Ellen Warner; Petrina A Causer; John W-N Wong; Frances C Wright; Roberta A Jong; Kimberley A Hill; Sandra J Messner; Martin J Yaffe; Steven A Narod; Donald B Plewes Journal: Breast J Date: 2011 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.431
Authors: Ellen Warner; Donald B Plewes; Kimberley A Hill; Petrina A Causer; Judit T Zubovits; Roberta A Jong; Margaret R Cutrara; Gerrit DeBoer; Martin J Yaffe; Sandra J Messner; Wendy S Meschino; Cameron A Piron; Steven A Narod Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-09-15 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Evanthia Kousi; Joely Smith; Araminta E Ledger; Erica Scurr; Steven Allen; Robin M Wilson; Elizabeth O'Flynn; Romney J E Pope; Martin O Leach; Maria A Schmidt Journal: Med Phys Date: 2017-11-30 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Araminta E W Ledger; Marco Borri; Romney J E Pope; Erica D Scurr; Toni Wallace; Cheryl Richardson; Marianne Usher; Steven Allen; Robin M Wilson; Karen Thomas; Nandita M deSouza; Martin O Leach; Maria A Schmidt Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2014-08-30 Impact factor: 3.173