TY - JOUR
T1 - A direct comparison of signal behavior between 4.0 and 1.5 T
T2 - A phantom study
AU - Uematsu, Hidemasa
AU - Dougherty, Lawrence
AU - Takahashi, Masaya
AU - Butler, Norman S.
AU - Song, Hee Kwon
AU - Ohno, Yoshiharu
AU - Gefter, Warren B.
AU - Schnall, Mitchell D.
AU - Hatabu, Hiroto
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported in part by a research grant from GE Medical Systems. We would like to thank Luna Hilaire, Ph.D., Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center for her assistance in data analysis and Lorene M. Yoxtheimer, B.S. for her assistance in manuscript preparation.
PY - 2003/2/1
Y1 - 2003/2/1
N2 - Introduction: Higher magnetic fields (≥3 T) afford higher spatial and/or temporal resolution in MR imaging with contrast agents, however, studies containing direct comparisons of signal intensity among different magnetic fields are substantially sparse. Our aim was to quantify the differences in terms of signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) between higher and lower (≤1.5 T) magnetic fields and to clarify the benefit of higher magnetic fields. Methods: The same sets of phantom experiments were conducted at both 4 and 1.5 T on whole-body MR scanners with head coils. Phantoms included different concentrations of Gd chelate water solution. A standard contrast-enhanced MR angiographic sequence with the same imaging parameters was utilized to confirm changes in signal intensities. Furthermore, the results were compared with a computer simulation. Results: Peak SNRs at 4 T increased at least 2.21 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T. Moreover, peak CNRs at 4 T increased at least 1.59 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T in the range of Gd concentration expected during clinical use. Conclusion: Higher magnetic fields benefit CNRs as well as SNRs. These advantages may lead to a high resolution imaging and reduction of scan time.
AB - Introduction: Higher magnetic fields (≥3 T) afford higher spatial and/or temporal resolution in MR imaging with contrast agents, however, studies containing direct comparisons of signal intensity among different magnetic fields are substantially sparse. Our aim was to quantify the differences in terms of signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) between higher and lower (≤1.5 T) magnetic fields and to clarify the benefit of higher magnetic fields. Methods: The same sets of phantom experiments were conducted at both 4 and 1.5 T on whole-body MR scanners with head coils. Phantoms included different concentrations of Gd chelate water solution. A standard contrast-enhanced MR angiographic sequence with the same imaging parameters was utilized to confirm changes in signal intensities. Furthermore, the results were compared with a computer simulation. Results: Peak SNRs at 4 T increased at least 2.21 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T. Moreover, peak CNRs at 4 T increased at least 1.59 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T in the range of Gd concentration expected during clinical use. Conclusion: Higher magnetic fields benefit CNRs as well as SNRs. These advantages may lead to a high resolution imaging and reduction of scan time.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037300438&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0037300438&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0720-048X(02)00037-2
DO - 10.1016/S0720-048X(02)00037-2
M3 - Article
C2 - 12536096
AN - SCOPUS:0037300438
SN - 0720-048X
VL - 45
SP - 154
EP - 159
JO - European journal of radiology
JF - European journal of radiology
IS - 2
ER -