Abdominal MR imaging at 3.0 T
- PMID: 17848701
- DOI: 10.1148/rg.275075023
Abdominal MR imaging at 3.0 T
Abstract
Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging at 3.0 T offers an improved signal-to-noise ratio compared with that at 1.5 T. However, the physics of high field strength also brings disadvantages, such as increases in the specific absorption rate, in magnetic field inhomogeneity effects, and in susceptibility artifacts. The use of 3.0-T MR imaging for abdominal evaluations, in particular, has lagged behind that for other applications because of the difficulty of imaging a large volume while compensating for respiratory motion. At a minimum, abdominal MR imaging at 3.0 T requires modifications in the pulse sequences used at 1.5 T. Such modifications may include a decrease in the flip angle used for refocusing pulses and an increase in the repetition time for T1-weighted acquisitions. In addition, parallel imaging and other techniques (hyper-echo sequences, transition between pseudo steady states) may be used to maintain a high signal-to-noise ratio while decreasing acquisition time and minimizing the occurrence of artifacts on abdominal MR images.
(c) RSNA, 2007.
Similar articles
-
Body MR imaging at 3.0 T: understanding the opportunities and challenges.Radiographics. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):1445-62; discussion 1462-4. doi: 10.1148/rg.275065204. Radiographics. 2007. PMID: 17848702 Review.
-
Forty-millisecond MR imaging of the abdomen at 2.0 T.Radiology. 1989 Oct;173(1):111-6. doi: 10.1148/radiology.173.1.2780996. Radiology. 1989. PMID: 2780996
-
3.0-T MR imaging of the abdomen: comparison with 1.5 T.Radiographics. 2008 Nov-Dec;28(7):1983-98. doi: 10.1148/rg.287075154. Radiographics. 2008. PMID: 19001653 Review.
-
T1-weighted snapshot gradient-echo MR imaging of the abdomen.Radiology. 1991 Oct;181(1):25-32. doi: 10.1148/radiology.181.1.1887041. Radiology. 1991. PMID: 1887041
-
Abdominal applications of 3.0-T MR imaging: comparative review versus a 1.5-T system.Radiographics. 2008 Jul-Aug;28(4):e30. doi: 10.1148/rg.e30. Epub 2008 Apr 21. Radiographics. 2008. PMID: 18426969 Review.
Cited by
-
Comparison of 3 T MRI and CT for the measurement of visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue in humans.Br J Radiol. 2012 Oct;85(1018):e826-30. doi: 10.1259/bjr/57987644. Epub 2012 Apr 18. Br J Radiol. 2012. PMID: 22514099 Free PMC article.
-
Preliminary Results of High-Precision Computed Diffusion Weighted Imaging for the Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma at 3 Tesla.J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2018 May/Jun;42(3):373-379. doi: 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000702. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2018. PMID: 29287019 Free PMC article.
-
3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging: A new standard in liver imaging?World J Hepatol. 2015 Jul 28;7(15):1894-8. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v7.i15.1894. World J Hepatol. 2015. PMID: 26244063 Free PMC article.
-
Parenchymal signal intensity in 3-T body MRI of dogs with hematopoietic neoplasia.Comp Med. 2013 Apr;63(2):174-82. Comp Med. 2013. PMID: 23582424 Free PMC article.
-
Radiology of the Mesentery.Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2022 Aug 14;35(4):328-337. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-1744481. eCollection 2022 Jul. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2022. PMID: 35975110 Free PMC article. Review.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical