Whole-Body High-Field-Strength (3.0-T) MR Imaging in Clinical Practice
 Part II. Technical Considerations and Clinical Applications

Abstract

This is the second part of a two-part series on the clinical applications of high-field-strength (3.0-T) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and spectroscopy. In this part, the current level of evidence regarding the use of higher magnetic field strengths for cardiac imaging techniques (including the assessment of cardiac anatomy and function), breast and pelvic imaging, musculoskeletal applications, pediatric imaging, and MR spectroscopy is presented. Published data are interpreted from the perspective of the clinical radiologist. Specific difficulties associated with high-field-strength MR for body imaging and for spectroscopic applications are reviewed and compared with the expected or documented added value of high-field-strength MR for clinical patient care. The overall number of studies published on clinical body high-field-strength MR is still small, and there is evidence for a clinical advantage for selected, but not all, body MR imaging applications. Even without published evidence, clinical experience suggests substantial clinical advantages for musculoskeletal and pediatric applications.

Multiparametric MRI biomarkers for measuring vascular disrupting effect on cancer

“…However, the applications in other regions of the body, the added value of 3.0 T compared with 1.5 T scanners is still controversial, due to issues such as specific absorption rate and motion and susceptibility artifacts. The modification of acquisition parameters and development of new coils may lead to wider applications in body imaging with 3.0 T MRI [80,81] .…”

In Vitro Evaluation of MR Imaging Issues at 3T for Aneurysm Clips Made from MP35N: Findings and Information Applied to 155 Additional Aneurysm Clips

“…[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] The clinical use of 3T MR systems continues to grow, with certain advantages reported at 3T compared with lower field strength scanners. 18 Biomedical implants pose possible risks and other concerns for patients referred for 3T MR imaging examinations, which include movement or displacement of the device, excessive heating of the object, and substantial artifacts, which may impact the diagnostic use of MR imaging. 7,8 Thus, it is necessary to perform in vitro testing at 3T to characterize these MR imaging problems for implants.…”

Ocular Volumetry Using Fast High-Resolution MRI during Visual Fixation

“…In further studies of ocular MR imaging by using equipment with higher gradient strengths and better performing surface receiver coils, the risk of electrical burns, tissue heating, and peripheral nerve stimulation must be considered. 25,26 Finally, ocular MR imaging is more complex and more expensive than sonography, but fast high-resolution ocular MR imaging with fixing of the subject's visual focus can provide additional information (ie, accurate morphologic and volumetric evaluation of intraocular lesions) that may affect treatment decisions in clinical ophthalmology.…”