Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2361040747
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Masi, J. N.
Right arrow Articles by Link, T. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Masi, J. N.
Right arrow Articles by Link, T. M.
(Radiology 2005;236:140-150.)
© RSNA, 2005


Experimental Studies

Cartilage MR Imaging at 3.0 versus That at 1.5 T: Preliminary Results in a Porcine Model1

Jeffrey N. Masi, BA, Christian A. Sell, BS, Catherine Phan, MD, Eric Han, PhD, David Newitt, PhD, Lynne Steinbach, MD, Sharmila Majumdar, PhD and Thomas M. Link, MD

1 From the Department of Radiology, University of California, San Francisco, 400 Parnassus Ave, A 367, Box 0628, San Francisco, CA 94143-0628 (J.N.M., C.A.S., C.P., D.N., L.S., S.M., T.M.L.); and GE Medical Systems, Milwaukee, Wis (E.H.). Received April 24, 2004; revision requested July 12; revision received August 5; accepted September 2. Address correspondence to T.M.L. (e-mail: tmlink{at}radiology.ucsf.edu).

PURPOSE: To compare 1.5- and 3.0-T magnetic resonance (MR) images of porcine knee specimens containing artificial cartilage lesions in terms of accuracy of lesion depiction, image quality, and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act–compliant study had institutional review board approval, and informed consent was obtained from the human volunteers. Two fat-saturated cartilage MR imaging sequences (an intermediate-weighted fast spin-echo [SE] sequence and a spoiled gradient-echo [GRE] sequence) were optimized for imaging at 3.0 T in two human volunteers and then used to image 10 porcine knees in which 29 artificial cartilage lesions had been created. Corresponding sequences were used at 1.5 T for all specimens. Images were assessed by two radiologists in consensus, and diagnostic performance in lesion depiction was determined by using macroscopic findings in specimen slices as a reference standard. SNRs were also calculated. For statistical analysis, the McNemar test of discordant pairs was used with a level of significance of P < .05.

RESULTS: The best diagnostic performance for both the intermediate-weighted fast SE and the spoiled GRE sequences was achieved at 3.0 T. With use of corresponding fat-saturated intermediate-weighted fast SE sequences with an identical acquisition time (9 minutes 44 seconds), 26 (90%) of 29 lesions were detected at 3.0 T, while 18 (62%) were detected at 1.5 T. With use of fat-saturated spoiled GRE sequences, 24 (83%) of 29 lesions were detected at 3.0 T (acquisition time, 8 minutes 48 seconds), and 23 (79%) lesions were detected at 1.5 T (acquisition time, 11 minutes 14 seconds). The rate of correct lesion grade assessment was 65% (17 of 26 lesions) at 3.0 T and 61% (11 of 18 lesions) at 1.5 T with the intermediate-weighted fast SE sequences and 83% (20 of 24 lesions) at 3.0 T and 70% (16 of 23 lesions) at 1.5 T with the spoiled GRE sequences. Both subjective evaluation of image quality and SNR values were significantly higher at 3.0 T (P < .05).

CONCLUSION: In this animal model, MR imaging at 3.0 T increased the accuracy of cartilage lesion assessment when compared with imaging at 1.5 T. Image quality and SNR were highest at 3.0 T.

© RSNA, 2005




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. Zhao, R. Krug, D. Xu, Y. Lu, and T. M. Link
MRI of the Spine: Image Quality and Normal-Neoplastic Bone Marrow Contrast at 3 T Versus 1.5 T
Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2009; 192(4): 873 - 880.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
R. Kijowski, D. G. Blankenbaker, K. W. Davis, K. Shinki, L. D. Kaplan, and A. A. De Smet
Comparison of 1.5- and 3.0-T MR Imaging for Evaluating the Articular Cartilage of the Knee Joint
Radiology, March 1, 2009; 250(3): 839 - 848.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
J. Y. Jung, Y. C. Yoon, S.-H. Choi, J. W. Kwon, J. Yoo, and B.-K. Choe
Three-dimensional Isotropic Shoulder MR Arthrography: Comparison with Two-dimensional MR Arthrography for the Diagnosis of Labral Lesions at 3.0 T
Radiology, February 1, 2009; 250(2): 498 - 505.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
C. K. Kuhl, F. Traber, J. Gieseke, W. Drahanowsky, N. Morakkabati-Spitz, W. Willinek, M. von Falkenhausen, C. Manka, and H. H. Schild
Whole-Body High-Field-Strength (3.0-T) MR Imaging in Clinical Practice * Part II. Technical Considerations and Clinical Applications
Radiology, April 1, 2008; 247(1): 16 - 35.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. S. Bauer, S. Banerjee, T. D. Henning, R. Krug, S. Majumdar, and T. M. Link
Fast High-Spatial-Resolution MRI of the Ankle with Parallel Imaging Using GRAPPA at 3 T
Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2007; 189(1): 240 - 245.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
N. Saupe, C. W. A. Pfirrmann, M. R. Schmid, T. Schertler, M. Manestar, and D. Weishaupt
MR Imaging of Cartilage in Cadaveric Wrists: Comparison between Imaging at 1.5 and 3.0 T and Gross Pathologic Inspection
Radiology, April 1, 2007; 243(1): 180 - 187.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
J. S. Bauer, S. J. Krause, C. J. Ross, R. Krug, J. Carballido-Gamio, E. Ozhinsky, S. Majumdar, and T. M. Link
Volumetric Cartilage Measurements of Porcine Knee at 1.5-T and 3.0-T MR Imaging: Evaluation of Precision and Accuracy.
Radiology, November 1, 2006; 241(2): 399 - 406.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
C. M. Phan, M. Matsuura, J. S. Bauer, T. C. Dunn, D. Newitt, E. M. Lochmueller, F. Eckstein, S. Majumdar, and T. M. Link
Trabecular Bone Structure of the Calcaneus: Comparison of MR Imaging at 3.0 and 1.5 T with Micro-CT as the Standard of Reference
Radiology, May 1, 2006; 239(2): 488 - 496.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]