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


     


Published online before print October 19, 2005, 10.1148/radiol.2373041672
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
2373041672v1
237/3/1014    most recent
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 Krautmacher, C.
Right arrow Articles by Kuhl, C. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Krautmacher, C.
Right arrow Articles by Kuhl, C. K.
(Radiology 2005;237:1014-1019.)
© RSNA, 2005


Neuroradiology

Brain Tumors: Full- and Half-Dose Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging at 3.0 T Compared with 1.5 T—Initial Experience1

Carsten Krautmacher, MD, Winfried A. Willinek, MD, Henriette J. Tschampa, MD, Mark Born, MD, Frank Träber, PhD, Jürgen Gieseke, PhD, Hans J. Textor, MD, Hans H. Schild, MD and Christiane K. Kuhl, MD

1 From the Department of Radiology, University of Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Strasse 25, D-53105 Bonn, Germany. Received September 29, 2004; revision requested December 2; revision received December 30; accepted January 25, 2005. Address correspondence to C.K. (Carsten.Krautmacher{at}ukb.uni-bonn.de).

PURPOSE: To prospectively and intraindividually compare the effect of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging at a higher magnetic field strength (3.0 T) on contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) at different doses of a T1-shortening contrast agent in patients with contrast-enhancing brain lesions, with 1.5-T MR imaging as a reference standard.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval and informed consent were obtained for all patient and volunteer studies. Twelve patients (six women, six men; mean age, 58 years; range, 29–76 years) with 12 enhancing brain lesions (11 patients with primary brain tumors and one with a solitary cerebral metastasis) underwent contrast material–enhanced MR imaging three times, on three separate days: once at 1.5 T with a full dose of 0.10 mmol/kg gadopentetate dimeglumine, once at 3.0 T with a full dose, and once at 3.0 T with half that dose, 0.05 mmol/kg. The same contrast-enhanced T1-weighted spin-echo images (repetition time msec/echo time msec, 500/12; section thickness, 5 mm; matrix, 256 x 205) were obtained at both 3.0 T and 1.5 T after prior optimization of parameters at 3.0 T. The number and conspicuity of enhancing brain lesions were assessed with blinded clinical image reading. Signal-to-noise ratio and CNR were determined with region of interest analysis of enhancing lesions and normal contralateral white matter. For 3.0 T with half the standard dose and with the full dose, CNR of lesions was intraindividually compared with CNR at 1.5 T with the full dose by using the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test.

RESULTS: At 3.0 T and full dose, CNR was 2.8-fold higher than that at 1.5 T and full dose (P < .001). At the same time, higher lesion conspicuity at clinical image reading was observed. With only half the standard dose, MR imaging at 3.0 T still yielded higher CNR (1.3-fold higher) than that with full dose at 1.5 T (P < .01).

CONCLUSION: With the same amount of contrast agent, MR imaging at 3.0 T offered a significantly higher CNR of enhancing cerebral lesions, compared with that at 1.5 T; even with the dose reduced by half, CNR was still higher at 3.0 T.

© RSNA, 2005




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
C. K. Kuhl, F. Traber, and H. H. Schild
Whole-Body High-Field-Strength (3.0-T) MR Imaging in Clinical Practice * Part I. Technical Considerations and Clinical Applications
Radiology, March 1, 2008; 246(3): 675 - 696.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
H. J. Michaely, H. Kramer, O. Dietrich, K. Nael, K.-P. Lodemann, M. F. Reiser, and S. O. Schoenberg
Intraindividual Comparison of High-Spatial-Resolution Abdominal MR Angiography at 1.5 T and 3.0 T: Initial Experience
Radiology, September 1, 2007; 244(3): 907 - 913.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
C. K. Kuhl, P. Jost, N. Morakkabati, O. Zivanovic, H. H. Schild, and J. Gieseke
Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging of the Breast at 3.0 and 1.5 T in the Same Patients: Initial Experience
Radiology, June 1, 2006; 239(3): 666 - 676.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2005 by the Radiological Society of North America.