Cardiac cine MR-imaging at 3T: FLASH vs SSFP.
The implications of an increase in field strength, from 1.5 T to 3 T, for routine functional cardiac examinations have been systematically investigated. Flip angle optimization was carried out for identical SSFP and FLASH cine imaging sequences at 1.5 T and 3 T, which supported the use of 20 degrees...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2006
|
| _version_ | 1797079058227396608 |
|---|---|
| author | Tyler, D Hudsmith, L Petersen, SE Francis, J Weale, P Neubauer, S Clarke, K Robson, M |
| author_facet | Tyler, D Hudsmith, L Petersen, SE Francis, J Weale, P Neubauer, S Clarke, K Robson, M |
| author_sort | Tyler, D |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | The implications of an increase in field strength, from 1.5 T to 3 T, for routine functional cardiac examinations have been systematically investigated. Flip angle optimization was carried out for identical SSFP and FLASH cine imaging sequences at 1.5 T and 3 T, which supported the use of 20 degrees (FLASH 1.5 T and 3 T) and >60 degrees (SSFP 1.5 T and 3 T). The optimized sequences were applied in a study of cardiac function in a group of ten normal volunteers. Both SSFP and FLASH sequences showed significant SNR increases in the myocardium and blood at 3 T compared with 1.5 T, increases of 48% and 30% (myocardium and blood, respectively) for the SSFP sequence and 19% and 13% for the FLASH sequence. The SSFP sequence also showed a significant increase in CNR (22%). Image quality assessment revealed that the SSFP acquisitions were superior to FLASH at both field strengths. Although SSFP contained more artifacts at 3 T, they would not prevent its clinical use. We conclude that cardiac functional examinations at 3 T should use SSFP sequences. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T00:40:14Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:82caddb1-d72e-4abf-916f-842d87532f6d |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T00:40:14Z |
| publishDate | 2006 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:82caddb1-d72e-4abf-916f-842d87532f6d2022-03-26T21:39:50ZCardiac cine MR-imaging at 3T: FLASH vs SSFP.Journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:82caddb1-d72e-4abf-916f-842d87532f6dEnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford2006Tyler, DHudsmith, LPetersen, SEFrancis, JWeale, PNeubauer, SClarke, KRobson, MThe implications of an increase in field strength, from 1.5 T to 3 T, for routine functional cardiac examinations have been systematically investigated. Flip angle optimization was carried out for identical SSFP and FLASH cine imaging sequences at 1.5 T and 3 T, which supported the use of 20 degrees (FLASH 1.5 T and 3 T) and >60 degrees (SSFP 1.5 T and 3 T). The optimized sequences were applied in a study of cardiac function in a group of ten normal volunteers. Both SSFP and FLASH sequences showed significant SNR increases in the myocardium and blood at 3 T compared with 1.5 T, increases of 48% and 30% (myocardium and blood, respectively) for the SSFP sequence and 19% and 13% for the FLASH sequence. The SSFP sequence also showed a significant increase in CNR (22%). Image quality assessment revealed that the SSFP acquisitions were superior to FLASH at both field strengths. Although SSFP contained more artifacts at 3 T, they would not prevent its clinical use. We conclude that cardiac functional examinations at 3 T should use SSFP sequences. |
| spellingShingle | Tyler, D Hudsmith, L Petersen, SE Francis, J Weale, P Neubauer, S Clarke, K Robson, M Cardiac cine MR-imaging at 3T: FLASH vs SSFP. |
| title | Cardiac cine MR-imaging at 3T: FLASH vs SSFP. |
| title_full | Cardiac cine MR-imaging at 3T: FLASH vs SSFP. |
| title_fullStr | Cardiac cine MR-imaging at 3T: FLASH vs SSFP. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Cardiac cine MR-imaging at 3T: FLASH vs SSFP. |
| title_short | Cardiac cine MR-imaging at 3T: FLASH vs SSFP. |
| title_sort | cardiac cine mr imaging at 3t flash vs ssfp |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT tylerd cardiaccinemrimagingat3tflashvsssfp AT hudsmithl cardiaccinemrimagingat3tflashvsssfp AT petersense cardiaccinemrimagingat3tflashvsssfp AT francisj cardiaccinemrimagingat3tflashvsssfp AT wealep cardiaccinemrimagingat3tflashvsssfp AT neubauers cardiaccinemrimagingat3tflashvsssfp AT clarkek cardiaccinemrimagingat3tflashvsssfp AT robsonm cardiaccinemrimagingat3tflashvsssfp |