Comparing real-world advantages for the clinical neuroradiologist between a high field (3 T), a phased array (1.5 T) vs. a single-channel 1.5-T MR system
✍ Scribed by Darren B. Orbach; Chris Wu; Meng Law; James S. Babb; Ray Lee; Abraham Padua; Edmond A. Knopp
- Book ID
- 102904531
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 2006
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 508 KB
- Volume
- 24
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 1053-1807
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
Abstract
Purpose
To evaluate signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR) and neuroradiologists' subjective assessments of image quality in 3‐Tesla (3‐T) or phased‐array MR systems that are now available for clinical neuroimaging.
Materials and Methods
Brain MR images of six normal volunteers were obtained on each of three scanners: a 1.5‐T single‐channel system, a 12‐channel, phased‐array system, and a 3‐T single‐channel system. Additionally, clinically optimized images acquired from 28 patients who underwent imaging in more than one of these systems were analyzed. SNRs were measured and image quality and artifact conspicuity were graded by two blinded readers.
Results
The phased‐array system produced higher SNR than either the 1.5‐T or the 3‐T single‐channel systems, and in no instance was it outperformed. Both blinded readers judged the phased‐array images to be of higher quality than those produced by the single‐channel systems, with significantly less artifact. The 3‐T magnet produced images with high SNR, but with increased artifact conspicuity. The phased‐array system markedly decreased acquisition times without introduction of artifacts.
Conclusion
Both quantitatively and qualitatively, the phased‐array system provided image quality superior to that of the 1.5‐T and 3‐T single‐channel systems. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2006. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.