Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using an Open 0.35 T System

Klein, Hans-Martin; Meyners, Werner; Neeb, Benjamin; Labenz, Joachim; Truümmler, Karl-Heinz

doi:10.1097/01.rct.0000238010.64931.c6

Cited by 16 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An open scanner configuration might impair image quality due to a potentially larger inhomogeneity of a vertical magnetic field. Moreover, until recently, such systems operated at rather low field strengths [11], [12], [13]. However, there is no study directly comparing the image quality of horizontal and vertical magnetic field MR systems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High-Field Open versus Short-Bore Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Spine: A Randomized Controlled Comparison of Image Quality

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe purpose of the present study was to compare the image quality of spinal magnetic resonance (MR) imaging performed on a high-field horizontal open versus a short-bore MR scanner in a randomized controlled study setup.MethodsAltogether, 93 (80% women, mean age 53) consecutive patients underwent spine imaging after random assignement to a 1-T horizontal open MR scanner with a vertical magnetic field or a 1.5-T short-bore MR scanner. This patient subset was part of a larger cohort. Image quality was assessed by determining qualitative parameters, signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNR), and quantitative contour sharpness.ResultsThe image quality parameters were higher for short-bore MR imaging. Regarding all sequences, the relative differences were 39% for the mean overall qualitative image quality, 53% for the mean SNR values, and 34–37% for the quantitative contour sharpness (P<0.0001). The CNR values were also higher for images obtained with the short-bore MR scanner. No sequence was of very poor (nondiagnostic) image quality. Scanning times were significantly longer for examinations performed on the open MR scanner (mean: 32±22 min versus 20±9 min; P<0.0001).ConclusionsIn this randomized controlled comparison of spinal MR imaging with an open versus a short-bore scanner, short-bore MR imaging revealed considerably higher image quality with shorter scanning times.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00715806

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High-Field Open versus Short-Bore Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Spine: A Randomized Controlled Comparison of Image Quality

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Standard bore magnets have aperture diameters of 60 cm with a table weight limit of 159 kg (Table 3) provide anatomic information about the heart, for perfusion or functional studies, higher field strengths were needed [36]. Weaker gradients of open MRI systems result in reduced signal-tonoise ratio (SNR).…”

Section: Magnetic Resonance Imagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

European obesity and the radiology department. What can we do to help?

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Obesity is a chronic disease that is now a global epidemic. The numbers of obese people are exponentially rising in Europe, and it is projected that in Europe by 2010 there will be 150 million obese people. The obesity-related health crisis does not only affect adults, with one in four European children now overweight. Radiologists, both adult and paediatric, need to be aware of the magnitude of the problem, and obese patients cannot be denied radiologic evaluation due to their size. Missed diagnosis, appointment cancellation and embarrassing situations for patients when they are referred for a radiological examination for which they are not suitable are all issues that can be avoided if careful provision is made to accommodate the needs of the obese patient requiring radiologic evaluation. This paper will discuss the epidemiology of obesity and the role of radiology in the assessment of obesity and disorders of fat metabolism. The limitations obesity poses to current radiological equipment and how the radiologist can optimise imaging in the obese patient will be described. Dose reference levels and dose control are discussed. Examples of how obesity both hinders and helps the radiologist will be illustrated. Techniques and pre-procedural preparation to help the obese patient in the interventional suite are discussed.

show abstract

“…However, it should first be considered whether the SNR available at lower field may be sufficient to generate diagnostic quality CMR images 14 , especially when bSSFP based pulse sequences and compressed sensing (CS) inspired image recovery methods are employed. Figure 1 shows the degradation in the quality of a segmented bSSFP cine series acquired at 1.5T when the SNR is retrospectively reduced by adding noise to the measured k-space data to simulate the impact of reduced field strength on SNR alone.…”

Section: The Technical Aspects Of Cmr At Low Fieldmentioning

confidence: 99%