Lung MRI at 3.0 T: a comparison of helical CT and high-field MRI in the detection of diffuse lung disease

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of high-field magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the lung using a T2-weighted fast-spin echo (TSE) sequence. Comparison was made with helical computed tomography CT findings in patients with diffuse pulmonary diseases. Prospective segment-wise analysis of high-field MR imaging findings in 15 patients with diffuse pulmonary diseases was made using helical CT and HRCT as the standard of reference. The MR studies were performed on a 3.0-T whole body system (Intera 3T, Philips Medical Systems) using a T2w TSE sequence with respiratory and cardiac gating (TE 80 ms TR 1,500-2,500 ms; turbo factor 17; 22 slices with 7/2-mm slice thickness and gap; 256x192 matrix). MR artifacts were graded on a three-point scale (low, moderate, high). Lung MR studies were prospectively analyzed segment-by-segment and diagnosed as healthy or pathological; results were compared with helical CT findings. In all 15 patients, MR imaging of the lung was successful. All 15 MR studies were compromised by artifacts; however, the severity of these artifacts was classified as low or moderate in 8/15, respectively, 7/15 cases. A total of 143/285 lung segments showed diffuse lung disease in helical CT. With MRI, 133 of these 143 segments (93%) were judged to be diseased. The ten segments that received false negative MR diagnoses displayed non-acute pulmonary lesions with inherently low proton density (scars, granulomas). MRI at 3.0 T can detect diffuse pulmonary disease with a high sensitivity. Based on this experience, further pulmonary studies with high-field systems appear justified and promising.

Muskuloskeletal MR imaging at 3.0 T: current status and future perspectives

“…MR imaging at 3.0 T allows high spatial resolution imaging of the pelvis which may be useful in assessing gynecological tumors [4]. Promising results have also been reported for 3.0 T MR imaging in assessing diffuse lung diseases [7], and there is evidence that an increased diagnostic value of cardiac imaging may also expected from MR imaging at 3.0 T [6]. Regarding the musculoskeletal disorders several studies [8][9][10][11] have demonstrated improved imaging quality and speed in imaging of musculoskeletal disorders at 3.0 T and provided preliminary evidence for concomitant improvement in diagnostic accuracy.…”

“…Although 3.0 T MR systems are used particularly for neuroradiological applications, several studies [4][5][6][7] have demonstrated the advantages of imaging at a higher magnetic field strength in different areas of body MR imaging. MR imaging at 3.0 T allows high spatial resolution imaging of the pelvis which may be useful in assessing gynecological tumors [4].…”

MRI of respiratory dynamics with 2D steady-state free-precession and 2D gradient echo sequences at 1.5 and 3 Tesla: an observer preference study

“…Multiple air-tissue interfaces result in large local magnetic gradients that cause intravoxel phase dispersion [24,25]. This makes lung MRI even more challenging at 3 T. Nevertheless, recent studies have shown the feasibility of MRI at 3 T to detect diffuse lung disease [19,26] and the increasing availability of 3-T MR systems in clinical routine (in some cases as alternative to 1.5 T) necessitates optimization of protocols for (dynamic) lung MRI (Table 8). …”

“…Therefore, dynamic sequences have been included into recommendations for standard MRI protocols of the lung with 1.5-T systems [6]. Initial results for non-dynamic lung MRI at 3 T are also described [19]. So far, the established FLASH 2D sequences provide a high temporal resolution (eight to nine acquisitions per second), but with an unsatisfying signal and parenchymal contrast.…”

The accurate staging of ovarian cancer using 3T magnetic resonance imaging – a realistic option

“…[26][27][28][29][30][31][32] MRI at this field strength allows us to double the SNR, which is fundamental in the quality of the final image. The signal determines the brightness of each image pixel and is proportional to the radio frequency (RF) emitted by the tissue.…”