Open 1.0-T versus closed 1.5-T cardiac MR: Image quality assessment
Authors/Creators
- 1. Unit of Diagnostic Imaging and Stereotactic Radiosurgery, CDI Centro Diagnostico Italiano, Via Saint Bon 20, 20147 Milan, Italy; Radiology Unit, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Italy. Electronic address: marco.ali@cdi.it.
- 2. Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133 Milano, Italy. Electronic address: caterina.monti@unimi.it.
- 3. Corso di Laurea in Medicina e Chirurgia, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Festa del Perdono 7, 20122 Milan, Italy.
- 4. Postgraduation School in Radiodiagnostics, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Festa del Perdono 7, 20122 Milano, Italy.
- 5. Unit of Diagnostic Imaging and Stereotactic Radiosurgery, CDI Centro Diagnostico Italiano, Via Saint Bon 20, 20147 Milan, Italy. Electronic address: sergio.papa@cdi.it.
- 6. Radiology Unit, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Italy; Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Italy. Electronic address: francesco.sardanelli@unimi.it.
- 7. Radiology Unit, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Italy; Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Italy. Electronic address: francesco.secchi@grupposandonato.it.
Description
Dataset from Alì M, Monti CB, Gold B, Lastella G, Papa S, Sardanelli F, Secchi F. Open 1.0-T versus closed 1.5-T cardiac MR: Image quality assessment. Clin Imaging. 2020 Dec;68:102-107. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2020.06.019. Epub 2020 Jun 15. PMID: 32585415.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this paper was to compare the open 1-T (O-1T) versus the closed 1.5-T (C-1.5T) cardiac magnetic resonance (MR).
Patients/methods: The MR examinations of two concurrent cohorts (each including 100 subjects) of patients with suspected or known cardiac disease were reviewed. Such examinations were obtained using O-1T or C-1.5T MRI. The bright-blood cine, T1-weighted (T1), T2-weighed short-tau inversion recovery (T2-STIR), late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) sequences were performed. Signal-to-noise ratio of blood (SNRb) or myocardium (SNRm), and contrast-to-noise ratio of myocardium (CNRm) were calculated. Subjective image quality (SIQ) of each sequence was graded as 0 = poor, 1 = intermediate, or 2 = optimal. Each examination was considered as diagnostic when the report answered the clinical question.
Results: C-1.5T was better than O-1T on cine for SNRb(median 172 versus 452), SNRm(71 versus 160) and CNRm (107 versus 265) and on T2-STIR for SNRb(10 versus 29), SNRm(74 versus 261) and CNRm(-67 versus -233)(P < 0.001). On LGE, SNRm was higher with O-1T than for C-1.5T (312 versus 79, P < 0.001) while CNR was lower (158 versus 389; P < 0.001). No significant differences were found for SNRb on LGE and both SNRm and CNRm on T1 (P ≥ 0.215). SIQ of O-1T was not significantly different from that of C-1.5T for both R1 and R2 for cine, T1, and LGE (P ≥ 0.157); for T2-STIR, SIQ of O-1T was significantly lower (P = 0.003). R1-R2 concordance was almost perfect (κ = 0.816-0.894), and all examinations were diagnostic.
Conclusion: Even though quantitative measurements mostly favored C-1.5T, the SIQ of O-1T was not significantly different for any sequence, with the only exception of T2-STIR.
Files
Restricted
The record is publicly accessible, but files are restricted. Log in to check if you have access.
Request access
If you would like to request access to these files, please fill out the form below.
You need to satisfy these conditions in order for this request to be accepted:
These data are available upon duly motivated request to the corresponding author of the article
You are currently not logged in. Do you have an account? Log in here