A direct comparison of signal behavior between 4.0 and 1.5 T: A phantom study

Hidemasa Uematsu, Lawrence Dougherty, Masaya Takahashi, Norman S. Butler, Hee Kwon Song, Yoshiharu Ohno, Warren B. Gefter, Mitchell D. Schnall, Hiroto Hatabu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: Higher magnetic fields (≥3 T) afford higher spatial and/or temporal resolution in MR imaging with contrast agents, however, studies containing direct comparisons of signal intensity among different magnetic fields are substantially sparse. Our aim was to quantify the differences in terms of signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) between higher and lower (≤1.5 T) magnetic fields and to clarify the benefit of higher magnetic fields. Methods: The same sets of phantom experiments were conducted at both 4 and 1.5 T on whole-body MR scanners with head coils. Phantoms included different concentrations of Gd chelate water solution. A standard contrast-enhanced MR angiographic sequence with the same imaging parameters was utilized to confirm changes in signal intensities. Furthermore, the results were compared with a computer simulation. Results: Peak SNRs at 4 T increased at least 2.21 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T. Moreover, peak CNRs at 4 T increased at least 1.59 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T in the range of Gd concentration expected during clinical use. Conclusion: Higher magnetic fields benefit CNRs as well as SNRs. These advantages may lead to a high resolution imaging and reduction of scan time.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)154-159
Number of pages6
JournalEuropean Journal of Radiology
Volume45
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2003

Fingerprint

Magnetic Fields
Signal-To-Noise Ratio
Noise
Computer Simulation
Contrast Media
Head
Water

Keywords

  • CNRs
  • Contrast agent
  • Higher magnetic field strength
  • Magnetic resonance imaging
  • SNRs

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Uematsu, H., Dougherty, L., Takahashi, M., Butler, N. S., Song, H. K., Ohno, Y., ... Hatabu, H. (2003). A direct comparison of signal behavior between 4.0 and 1.5 T: A phantom study. European Journal of Radiology, 45(2), 154-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0720-048X(02)00037-2

A direct comparison of signal behavior between 4.0 and 1.5 T : A phantom study. / Uematsu, Hidemasa; Dougherty, Lawrence; Takahashi, Masaya; Butler, Norman S.; Song, Hee Kwon; Ohno, Yoshiharu; Gefter, Warren B.; Schnall, Mitchell D.; Hatabu, Hiroto.

In: European Journal of Radiology, Vol. 45, No. 2, 01.02.2003, p. 154-159.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Uematsu, H, Dougherty, L, Takahashi, M, Butler, NS, Song, HK, Ohno, Y, Gefter, WB, Schnall, MD & Hatabu, H 2003, 'A direct comparison of signal behavior between 4.0 and 1.5 T: A phantom study', European Journal of Radiology, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 154-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0720-048X(02)00037-2
Uematsu H, Dougherty L, Takahashi M, Butler NS, Song HK, Ohno Y et al. A direct comparison of signal behavior between 4.0 and 1.5 T: A phantom study. European Journal of Radiology. 2003 Feb 1;45(2):154-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0720-048X(02)00037-2
Uematsu, Hidemasa ; Dougherty, Lawrence ; Takahashi, Masaya ; Butler, Norman S. ; Song, Hee Kwon ; Ohno, Yoshiharu ; Gefter, Warren B. ; Schnall, Mitchell D. ; Hatabu, Hiroto. / A direct comparison of signal behavior between 4.0 and 1.5 T : A phantom study. In: European Journal of Radiology. 2003 ; Vol. 45, No. 2. pp. 154-159.
@article{99ef161498b44f56b542afbf0103c5b6,
title = "A direct comparison of signal behavior between 4.0 and 1.5 T: A phantom study",
abstract = "Introduction: Higher magnetic fields (≥3 T) afford higher spatial and/or temporal resolution in MR imaging with contrast agents, however, studies containing direct comparisons of signal intensity among different magnetic fields are substantially sparse. Our aim was to quantify the differences in terms of signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) between higher and lower (≤1.5 T) magnetic fields and to clarify the benefit of higher magnetic fields. Methods: The same sets of phantom experiments were conducted at both 4 and 1.5 T on whole-body MR scanners with head coils. Phantoms included different concentrations of Gd chelate water solution. A standard contrast-enhanced MR angiographic sequence with the same imaging parameters was utilized to confirm changes in signal intensities. Furthermore, the results were compared with a computer simulation. Results: Peak SNRs at 4 T increased at least 2.21 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T. Moreover, peak CNRs at 4 T increased at least 1.59 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T in the range of Gd concentration expected during clinical use. Conclusion: Higher magnetic fields benefit CNRs as well as SNRs. These advantages may lead to a high resolution imaging and reduction of scan time.",
keywords = "CNRs, Contrast agent, Higher magnetic field strength, Magnetic resonance imaging, SNRs",
author = "Hidemasa Uematsu and Lawrence Dougherty and Masaya Takahashi and Butler, {Norman S.} and Song, {Hee Kwon} and Yoshiharu Ohno and Gefter, {Warren B.} and Schnall, {Mitchell D.} and Hiroto Hatabu",
year = "2003",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0720-048X(02)00037-2",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "45",
pages = "154--159",
journal = "Journal of Medical Imaging",
issn = "0720-048X",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A direct comparison of signal behavior between 4.0 and 1.5 T

T2 - A phantom study

AU - Uematsu, Hidemasa

AU - Dougherty, Lawrence

AU - Takahashi, Masaya

AU - Butler, Norman S.

AU - Song, Hee Kwon

AU - Ohno, Yoshiharu

AU - Gefter, Warren B.

AU - Schnall, Mitchell D.

AU - Hatabu, Hiroto

PY - 2003/2/1

Y1 - 2003/2/1

N2 - Introduction: Higher magnetic fields (≥3 T) afford higher spatial and/or temporal resolution in MR imaging with contrast agents, however, studies containing direct comparisons of signal intensity among different magnetic fields are substantially sparse. Our aim was to quantify the differences in terms of signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) between higher and lower (≤1.5 T) magnetic fields and to clarify the benefit of higher magnetic fields. Methods: The same sets of phantom experiments were conducted at both 4 and 1.5 T on whole-body MR scanners with head coils. Phantoms included different concentrations of Gd chelate water solution. A standard contrast-enhanced MR angiographic sequence with the same imaging parameters was utilized to confirm changes in signal intensities. Furthermore, the results were compared with a computer simulation. Results: Peak SNRs at 4 T increased at least 2.21 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T. Moreover, peak CNRs at 4 T increased at least 1.59 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T in the range of Gd concentration expected during clinical use. Conclusion: Higher magnetic fields benefit CNRs as well as SNRs. These advantages may lead to a high resolution imaging and reduction of scan time.

AB - Introduction: Higher magnetic fields (≥3 T) afford higher spatial and/or temporal resolution in MR imaging with contrast agents, however, studies containing direct comparisons of signal intensity among different magnetic fields are substantially sparse. Our aim was to quantify the differences in terms of signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) between higher and lower (≤1.5 T) magnetic fields and to clarify the benefit of higher magnetic fields. Methods: The same sets of phantom experiments were conducted at both 4 and 1.5 T on whole-body MR scanners with head coils. Phantoms included different concentrations of Gd chelate water solution. A standard contrast-enhanced MR angiographic sequence with the same imaging parameters was utilized to confirm changes in signal intensities. Furthermore, the results were compared with a computer simulation. Results: Peak SNRs at 4 T increased at least 2.21 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T. Moreover, peak CNRs at 4 T increased at least 1.59 times higher compared with those at 1.5 T in the range of Gd concentration expected during clinical use. Conclusion: Higher magnetic fields benefit CNRs as well as SNRs. These advantages may lead to a high resolution imaging and reduction of scan time.

KW - CNRs

KW - Contrast agent

KW - Higher magnetic field strength

KW - Magnetic resonance imaging

KW - SNRs

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037300438&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0037300438&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0720-048X(02)00037-2

DO - 10.1016/S0720-048X(02)00037-2

M3 - Article

C2 - 12536096

AN - SCOPUS:0037300438

VL - 45

SP - 154

EP - 159

JO - Journal of Medical Imaging

JF - Journal of Medical Imaging

SN - 0720-048X

IS - 2

ER -