Klumpp Bernhard D, Sandstede Joern, Lodemann Klaus P, Seeger Achim, Hoevelborn Tobias, Fenchel Michael, Kramer Ulrich, Claussen Claus D, Miller Stephan
Department for Diagnostic Radiology, Eberhard Karls University Tuebingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany.
Eur Radiol. 2009 May;19(5):1124-31. doi: 10.1007/s00330-008-1248-7. Epub 2008 Dec 18.
For contrast-enhanced imaging techniques relying on strong T1 weighting, 3 T provides increased contrast compared with 1.5 T. The aim of our study was the intraindividual comparison of delayed enhancement MR imaging at 1.5 T and at 3 T. Twenty patients with myocardial infarction were examined at 1.5 T and 3 T. Fifteen minutes after injection of contrast agent (0.1 mmol gadobenate dimeglumine per kg body weight), inversion recovery gradient recalled echo (IR-GRE) sequences were acquired (1.5 T/3 T: TR 11.0/9.9 ms, TE 4.4/4.9 ms, flip 30 degrees /30 degrees , slice thickness 6/6 mm) to assess myocardial viability. Two observers rated image quality (Wilcoxon signed rank test). Quantification of hyperenhanced myocardium and standardized SNR/CNR measurements were performed (Student's t test). There was no significant difference with respect to image quality (1.5 T/3 T: 3.5/3.3, p = 0.34, reader 1; 2.4/2.7, p = 0.12, reader 2) and infarction size (760 +/- 566/828 +/- 677 mm(2) at 1.5 T, 808 +/- 639/826 +/- 726 mm(2) at 3 T, reader 1/reader 2, p > 0.05). Mean SNR in hyperenhanced/normal myocardium was 19.2/6.2 at 1.5 T and 29.5/8.8 at 3 T (p < 0.05). Mean CNR was 14.3 at 1.5 T and 26.0 at 3 T (p < 0.05). Delayed enhancement MR imaging at 3 T is a robust procedure yielding superior tissue contrast at 3 T compared with 1.5 T which is, however, not reflected by increased image quality.
对于依赖强T1加权的对比增强成像技术,与1.5T相比,3T能提供更高的对比度。我们研究的目的是对1.5T和3T下的延迟增强磁共振成像进行个体内比较。20例心肌梗死患者分别在1.5T和3T下接受检查。注射造影剂(每千克体重0.1mmol钆贝葡胺)15分钟后,采集反转恢复梯度回波(IR-GRE)序列(1.5T/3T:重复时间11.0/9.9毫秒,回波时间4.4/4.9毫秒,翻转角30度/30度,层厚6/6毫米)以评估心肌活力。两名观察者对图像质量进行评分(Wilcoxon符号秩检验)。对心肌强化区域进行定量分析,并进行标准化信噪比/对比噪声比测量(Student's t检验)。图像质量方面无显著差异(1.5T/3T:3.5/3.3,p = 0.34,观察者1;2.4/2.7,p = 0.