TY - JOUR
T1 - Analysis of cardiac function - Comparison between 1.5 tesla and 3.0 tesla cardiac cine magnetic resonance imaging
T2 - Preliminary experience
AU - Michaely, Henrik J.
AU - Nael, Kambiz
AU - Schoenberg, Stefan O.
AU - Laub, Gerhard
AU - Reiser, Maximilian F.
AU - Finn, J. Paul
AU - Ruehm, Stefan G.
PY - 2006/2
Y1 - 2006/2
N2 - PURPOSE: We sought to assess the feasibility of magnetic resonance imaging to evaluate cardiac function at 3.0 T compared with 1.5 T. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a prospective intraindividual comparative study, 12 volunteers (range, 18-54 years), and 2 patients (range, 43-53 years) underwent cardiac cine magnetic resonance at both 3.0 T and 1.5 T. Data were acquired both with a steady-state free precession sequence (SSFP) and a spoiled gradient echo (SGE) sequence. If necessary, a frequency scout was used to correct for off-resonance artifacts. For both SSFP and SGE imaging, 6-mm thick retrospectively EKG-gated short axis views were acquired with equal matrix size (192 x 163) and comparable repetition time (TR). Cardiac function parameters were determined manually by a single investigator. Cardiac function parameters, signal to noise ratio (SNR), contrast to noise ratio (CNR), and the presence of artifacts were compared between the 2 magnetic field strengths. For statistical analysis, a Pearson's correlation coefficient was calculated, and a paired Student t test was used to test statistical significance. RESULTS: Very good correlations between cardiac function parameters at 1.5 T and 3.0 T (r > 0.84, P < 0.0011) were obtained. Compared with SGE, SSFP more frequently was prone to artifacts. With SSFP/SGE at 3.0 T, a SNR gain of 9.4/16% was achieved compared with 1.5 T. CONCLUSION: Functional cardiac cine magnetic resonance imaging can be regarded as equally accurate at 3.0 T compared with 1.5 T. Compared with SSFP imaging, the SGE sequence benefits more from higher field strengths and is less affected by artifacts.
AB - PURPOSE: We sought to assess the feasibility of magnetic resonance imaging to evaluate cardiac function at 3.0 T compared with 1.5 T. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a prospective intraindividual comparative study, 12 volunteers (range, 18-54 years), and 2 patients (range, 43-53 years) underwent cardiac cine magnetic resonance at both 3.0 T and 1.5 T. Data were acquired both with a steady-state free precession sequence (SSFP) and a spoiled gradient echo (SGE) sequence. If necessary, a frequency scout was used to correct for off-resonance artifacts. For both SSFP and SGE imaging, 6-mm thick retrospectively EKG-gated short axis views were acquired with equal matrix size (192 x 163) and comparable repetition time (TR). Cardiac function parameters were determined manually by a single investigator. Cardiac function parameters, signal to noise ratio (SNR), contrast to noise ratio (CNR), and the presence of artifacts were compared between the 2 magnetic field strengths. For statistical analysis, a Pearson's correlation coefficient was calculated, and a paired Student t test was used to test statistical significance. RESULTS: Very good correlations between cardiac function parameters at 1.5 T and 3.0 T (r > 0.84, P < 0.0011) were obtained. Compared with SGE, SSFP more frequently was prone to artifacts. With SSFP/SGE at 3.0 T, a SNR gain of 9.4/16% was achieved compared with 1.5 T. CONCLUSION: Functional cardiac cine magnetic resonance imaging can be regarded as equally accurate at 3.0 T compared with 1.5 T. Compared with SSFP imaging, the SGE sequence benefits more from higher field strengths and is less affected by artifacts.
KW - 1.5 Tesla
KW - 3.0 Tesla
KW - Artifacts
KW - Cardiac cine imaging
KW - Cardiac function
KW - Comparison study
KW - High-field imaging
KW - Magnetic resonance imaging
KW - Spoiled gradient echo
KW - Steady state free precession
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33646362302&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33646362302&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/01.rli.0000192023.96494.af
DO - 10.1097/01.rli.0000192023.96494.af
M3 - Article
C2 - 16428984
AN - SCOPUS:33646362302
SN - 0020-9996
VL - 41
SP - 133
EP - 140
JO - Investigative Radiology
JF - Investigative Radiology
IS - 2
ER -