PURPOSE: To investigate for the first time the feasibility of aortic four-dimensional (4D) flow at 7T, both contrast enhanced (CE) and non-CE. To quantify the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) in aortic 4D flow as a function of field strength and CE with gadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance). METHODS: Six healthy male volunteers were scanned at 1.5T, 3T, and 7T with both non-CE and CE acquisitions. Temporal SNR was calculated. Flip angle optimization for CE 4D flow was carried out using Bloch simulations that were validated against in vivo measurements. RESULTS: The 7T provided 2.2 times the SNR of 3T while 3T provided 1.7 times the SNR of 1.5T in non-CE acquisitions in the descending aorta. The SNR gains achieved by CE were 1.8-fold at 1.5T, 1.7-fold at 3T, and 1.4-fold at 7T, respectively. CONCLUSION: The 7T provides a new tool to explore aortic 4D flow, yielding higher SNR that can be used to push the boundaries of acceleration and resolution. Field strength and contrast enhancement at all fields provide significant improvements in SNR.
PURPOSE: To investigate for the first time the feasibility of aortic four-dimensional (4D) flow at 7T, both contrast enhanced (CE) and non-CE. To quantify the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) in aortic 4D flow as a function of field strength and CE with gadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance). METHODS: Six healthy male volunteers were scanned at 1.5T, 3T, and 7T with both non-CE and CE acquisitions. Temporal SNR was calculated. Flip angle optimization for CE 4D flow was carried out using Bloch simulations that were validated against in vivo measurements. RESULTS: The 7T provided 2.2 times the SNR of 3T while 3T provided 1.7 times the SNR of 1.5T in non-CE acquisitions in the descending aorta. The SNR gains achieved by CE were 1.8-fold at 1.5T, 1.7-fold at 3T, and 1.4-fold at 7T, respectively. CONCLUSION: The 7T provides a new tool to explore aortic 4D flow, yielding higher SNR that can be used to push the boundaries of acceleration and resolution. Field strength and contrast enhancement at all fields provide significant improvements in SNR.
Authors: Ani Oganesyan; Alexander Hoffner-Heinike; Alex J Barker; Benjamin S Frank; D Dunbar Ivy; Kendall S Hunter; Max B Mitchell; Stephen M Humphries; Brett E Fenster; Michal Schäfer Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2021-05-21 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Jing Liu; Louise Koskas; Farshid Faraji; Evan Kao; Yan Wang; Henrik Haraldsson; Sarah Kefayati; Chengcheng Zhu; Sinyeob Ahn; Gerhard Laub; David Saloner Journal: MAGMA Date: 2017-08-07 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Kamil Uğurbil; Pierre-Francois Van de Moortele; Andrea Grant; Edward J Auerbach; Arcan Ertürk; Russell Lagore; Jutta M Ellermann; Xiaoxuan He; Gregor Adriany; Gregory J Metzger Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 2.266
Authors: Sebastian Schmitter; Gregor Adriany; Matt Waks; Steen Moeller; Maria Aristova; Alireza Vali; Edward J Auerbach; Pierre-François Van de Moortele; Kamil Ugurbil; Susanne Schnell Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2020-03-18 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Fabrizio Donati; C Alberto Figueroa; Nicolas P Smith; Pablo Lamata; David A Nordsletten Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2015-09-08 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: Michal Schäfer; Alex J Barker; Vitaly Kheyfets; Kurt R Stenmark; James Crapo; Michael E Yeager; Uyen Truong; J Kern Buckner; Brett E Fenster; Kendall S Hunter Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2017-12-20 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Bram F Coolen; Claudia Calcagno; Pim van Ooij; Zahi A Fayad; Gustav J Strijkers; Aart J Nederveen Journal: MAGMA Date: 2017-08-14 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Petter Dyverfeldt; Malenka Bissell; Alex J Barker; Ann F Bolger; Carl-Johan Carlhäll; Tino Ebbers; Christopher J Francios; Alex Frydrychowicz; Julia Geiger; Daniel Giese; Michael D Hope; Philip J Kilner; Sebastian Kozerke; Saul Myerson; Stefan Neubauer; Oliver Wieben; Michael Markl Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2015-08-10 Impact factor: 5.364