Open 1.0-T versus closed 1.5-T cardiac MR: Image quality assessment

被引:6
|
作者
Ali, Marco [1 ,5 ]
Monti, Caterina Beatrice [2 ]
Gold, Barak [3 ]
Lastella, Giulia [4 ]
Papa, Sergio [1 ]
Sardanelli, Francesco [5 ,6 ]
Secchi, Francesco [5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] CDI Ctr Diagnost Italiano, Unit Diagnost Imaging & Stereotact Radiosurg, Via St Bon 20, I-20147 Milan, Italy
[2] Univ Milan, Dept Biomed Sci Hlth, Via Mangiagalli 31, I-20133 Milan, Italy
[3] Univ Milan, Corso Laurea Med & Chirurgia, Via Festa Perdono 7, I-20122 Milan, Italy
[4] Univ Milan, Postgrad Sch Radiodiagnost, Via Festa Perdono 7, I-20122 Milan, Italy
[5] IRCCS Policlin San Donato, Radiol Unit, Via Morandi 30, I-20097 San Donato Milanese, Italy
[6] Univ Milan, Dept Biomed Sci Hlth, Via Morandi 30, I-20097 San Donato Milanese, Italy
关键词
Cardiac magnetic resonance; Reproducibility; Obese patients; Claustrophobic patients; Open magnetic resonance; TESLA;
D O I
10.1016/j.clinimag.2020.06.019
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: The aim of this paper was to compare the open 1-T (O-1T) versus the closed 1.5-T (C-1.5T) cardiac magnetic resonance (MR). Patients/methods: The MR examinations of two concurrent cohorts (each including 100 subjects) of patients with suspected or known cardiac disease were reviewed. Such examinations were obtained using O-1T or C-1.5T MRI. The bright-blood cine, T1-weighted (T1), T2-weighed short-tau inversion recovery (T2-STIR), late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) sequences were performed. Signal-to-noise ratio of blood (SNRb) or myocardium (SNRm), and contrast-to-noise ratio of myocardium (CNRm) were calculated. Subjective image quality (SIQ) of each sequence was graded as 0 = poor, 1 = intermediate, or 2 = optimal. Each examination was considered as diagnostic when the report answered the clinical question. Results: C-1.5T was better than O-1T on cine for SNRb(median 172 versus 452), SNRm(71 versus 160) and CNRm (107 versus 265) and on T2-STIR for SNRb(10 versus 29), SNRm(74 versus 261) and CNRm(-67 versus -233) (P < 0.001). On LGE, SNRm was higher with O-1T than for C-1.5T (312 versus 79, P < 0.001) while CNR was lower (158 versus 389; P < 0.001). No significant differences were found for SNRb on LGE and both SNRm and CNRm on T1 (P >= 0.215). SIQ of O-1T was not significantly different from that of C-1.5T for both R1 and R2 for cine, T1, and LGE (P >_ 0.157); for T2-STIR, SIQ of O-1T was significantly lower (P = 0.003). R1-R2 concordance was almost perfect (kappa = 0.816-0.894), and all examinations were diagnostic. Conclusion: Even though quantitative measurements mostly favored C-1.5T, the SIQ of O-1T was not significantly different for any sequence, with the only exception of T2-STIR.
引用
收藏
页码:102 / 107
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of 1.0-T Extremity MR and 1.5-T Conventional High-Field-Strength MR in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis
    Naraghi, Ali M.
    White, Lawrence M.
    Patel, Chirag
    Tomlinson, George
    Keystone, Edward C.
    RADIOLOGY, 2009, 251 (03) : 829 - 837
  • [2] MAGNETIC-RESONANCE IMAGING OF THE LUMBAR SPINE AT 0.5-T, 1.0-T AND 1.5-T
    DIXON, AK
    FREER, CEL
    HAWKINS, TD
    HALL, LD
    GLEAVE, J
    PALEY, M
    RANDELL, C
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 1988, 61 (728): : 723 - 723
  • [3] BREATH-HOLD T2-WEIGHTED SEQUENCES OF THE LIVER - A COMPARISON OF 4 TECHNIQUES AT 1.0-T AND 1.5-T
    SIMM, FC
    SEMELKA, RC
    RECHT, M
    DEIMLING, M
    LENZ, G
    LAUB, GA
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 1992, 10 (01) : 41 - 47
  • [4] Pelvimetry and patient acceptability compared between open 0.5-T and closed 1.5-T MR systems
    Sven C. Michel
    Annett Rake
    Lutz Götzmann
    Burkhardt Seifert
    Mattia Ferrazzini
    Rabih Chaoui
    Karl Treiber
    Thomas M. Keller
    Borut Marincek
    Rahel A. Kubik-Huch
    European Radiology, 2002, 12 : 2898 - 2905
  • [5] Improved image quality of intracranial aneurysms: 3.0-T versus 1.5-T time-of-flight MR angiography
    Gibbs, GF
    Huston, J
    Bernstein, MA
    Riederer, SJ
    Brown, RD
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY, 2004, 25 (01) : 84 - 87
  • [6] Pelvimetry and patient acceptability compared between open 0.5-T and closed 1.5-T MR systems
    Michel, SCA
    Rake, A
    Götzmann, L
    Seifert, B
    Ferrazzini, M
    Chaoui, R
    Treiber, K
    Keller, TM
    Marincek, B
    Kubik-Huch, RA
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2002, 12 (12) : 2898 - 2905
  • [7] T1-WEIGHTED SEQUENCES FOR MR IMAGING OF THE LIVER - COMPARISON OF 3 TECHNIQUES FOR SINGLE-BREATH, WHOLE-VOLUME ACQUISITION AT 1.0-T AND 1.5-T
    SEMELKA, RC
    SIMM, FC
    RECHT, M
    DEIMLING, M
    LENZ, G
    LAUB, GA
    RADIOLOGY, 1991, 180 (03) : 629 - 635
  • [8] MR IMAGING OF THE LARYNX AT 1.5-T
    SAKAI, F
    GAMSU, G
    DILLON, WP
    LYNCH, DA
    GILBERT, TJ
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY, 1990, 14 (01) : 60 - 71
  • [9] OSTEOPETROSIS - MR CHARACTERISTICS AT 1.5-T
    RAO, VM
    DALINKA, MK
    MITCHELL, DG
    SPRITZER, CE
    KAPLAN, F
    AUGUST, CS
    AXEL, L
    KRESSEL, HY
    RADIOLOGY, 1986, 161 (01) : 217 - 220
  • [10] Optimization of cardiac cine in the rat on a clinical 1.5-T MR system
    Montet-Abou, K.
    Daire, J. L.
    Ivancevic, M. K.
    Hyacinthe, J. N.
    Nguyen, D.
    Jorge-Costa, M.
    Morel, D. R.
    Vallee, J. P.
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE MATERIALS IN PHYSICS BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, 2006, 19 (03) : 144 - 151