M E Ladd1, M Bock. 1. Erwin L. Hahn Institute for Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Institut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie und Neuroradiologie, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Arendahls Wiese 199, 45141, Essen, Deutschland. mark.ladd@uni-duisburg-essen.de
Abstract
CLINICAL/METHODICAL ISSUE: The spatial, temporal and spectral resolution in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is in many cases currently not sufficient to detect submillimeter lesions or to image the dynamics of the beating heart. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL METHODS: At present MRI systems at 1.5 T and 3 T are the standard units for clinical imaging. METHODICAL INNOVATIONS: The use of ultrahigh magnetic fields of 7 T and higher increases the signal-to-noise ratio, which holds promise for a significant improvement of the spatial and/or temporal resolution as well as for new contrast mechanisms. PERFORMANCE: With 7 T MRI, images of the brain have been acquired routinely with a spatial resolution of 0.3 mm. The theoretical improvement of the signal-to-noise ratio is often not fully realized due to B1 inhomogeneities and contrast variations. ACHIEVEMENTS: With MRI at 7 T a notable increase in spatial resolution can be achieved. Methods such as time-of-flight MR angiography and susceptibility-weighted imaging (e.g. neurofunctional MRI, fMRI) profit especially from the higher field strengths. Transmission field inhomogeneities are still a major challenge for ultrahigh field (UHF) MRI and are also a partially unsolved safety problem. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: The use of UHF MRI is currently limited to special applications and the expected gain of the high field must be weighed against technical limitations in both image acquisition and interpretation.
CLINICAL/METHODICAL ISSUE: The spatial, temporal and spectral resolution in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is in many cases currently not sufficient to detect submillimeter lesions or to image the dynamics of the beating heart. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL METHODS: At present MRI systems at 1.5 T and 3 T are the standard units for clinical imaging. METHODICAL INNOVATIONS: The use of ultrahigh magnetic fields of 7 T and higher increases the signal-to-noise ratio, which holds promise for a significant improvement of the spatial and/or temporal resolution as well as for new contrast mechanisms. PERFORMANCE: With 7 T MRI, images of the brain have been acquired routinely with a spatial resolution of 0.3 mm. The theoretical improvement of the signal-to-noise ratio is often not fully realized due to B1 inhomogeneities and contrast variations. ACHIEVEMENTS: With MRI at 7 T a notable increase in spatial resolution can be achieved. Methods such as time-of-flight MR angiography and susceptibility-weighted imaging (e.g. neurofunctional MRI, fMRI) profit especially from the higher field strengths. Transmission field inhomogeneities are still a major challenge for ultrahigh field (UHF) MRI and are also a partially unsolved safety problem. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: The use of UHF MRI is currently limited to special applications and the expected gain of the high field must be weighed against technical limitations in both image acquisition and interpretation.
Authors: Kâmil Uğurbil; Gregor Adriany; Peter Andersen; Wei Chen; Michael Garwood; Rolf Gruetter; Pierre-Gil Henry; Seong-Gi Kim; Haiying Lieu; Ivan Tkac; Tommy Vaughan; Pierre-Francoise Van De Moortele; Essa Yacoub; Xiao-Hong Zhu Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Christina Heilmaier; Jens M Theysohn; Stefan Maderwald; Oliver Kraff; Mark E Ladd; Susanne C Ladd Journal: Bioelectromagnetics Date: 2011-05-19 Impact factor: 2.010
Authors: Iris M Noebauer-Huhmann; Pavol Szomolanyi; Vladimír Juras; Oliver Kraff; Mark E Ladd; Siegfried Trattnig Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: P J Wright; O E Mougin; J J Totman; A M Peters; M J Brookes; R Coxon; P E Morris; M Clemence; S T Francis; R W Bowtell; P A Gowland Journal: MAGMA Date: 2008-02-08 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Yacine Noureddine; Andreas K Bitz; Mark E Ladd; Markus Thürling; Susanne C Ladd; Gregor Schaefers; Oliver Kraff Journal: MAGMA Date: 2015-09-26 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Juliane Goebel; Felix Nensa; Haemi P Schemuth; Stefan Maderwald; Thomas Schlosser; Stephan Orzada; Stefan Rietsch; Harald H Quick; Kai Nassenstein Journal: Eur J Radiol Open Date: 2018-09-11