Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 10/2008

01-10-2008 | Magnetic Resonance

Comparison of image quality in magnetic resonance imaging of the knee at 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla using 32-channel receiver coils

Authors: F. Schoth, N. Kraemer, T. Niendorf, C. Hohl, R. W. Gunther, G. A. Krombach

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 10/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

We examined to what degree the visualization of anatomic structures in the human knee is improved using 3.0-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and many element RF receive coils as compared to 1.5 T. We imaged 20 knees at 1.5 and 3.0 T using T2-weighted STIR, T2-weighted gradient echo, T1-weighted spin-echo, true-FISP and T2-weighted fast spin echo techniques in conjunction with 32-element RF coil arrays. The 3.0-T examination was considerably faster than its 1.5-T counterpart. A superior subjective visibility at 3.0 T vs 1.5 T was found in 27 of 50 evaluated structures (meniscus, ligaments) with the exception of true-FISP techniques. The 3.0-T examination provided a better visibility (evaluated by blinded consensus-reading by two radiologists) of small structures such as the ligamentum transversum genu. Also, cartilage was better delineated at 3.0 T. A 23% increased average signal-to-noise ratio as assessed using a temporal filter was observed at 3.0 T as compared to 1.5 T. At 3.0 T, imaging of the human knee is faster and results in a subjective visibility of anatomic structures that is superior to and competitive with 1.5 T.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Jackson JL, O’Malley PG, Kroenke K (2003) Evaluation of acute knee pain in primary care. Ann Intern Med 139:575–588PubMed Jackson JL, O’Malley PG, Kroenke K (2003) Evaluation of acute knee pain in primary care. Ann Intern Med 139:575–588PubMed
2.
go back to reference Kuikka PI, Kiuru MJ, Niva MH, Kroger H, Pihlajamaki HK (2006) Sensitivity of routine 1.0-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging versus arthroscopy as gold standard in fresh traumatic chondral lesions of the knee in young adults. Arthroscopy 22:1033–1039PubMedCrossRef Kuikka PI, Kiuru MJ, Niva MH, Kroger H, Pihlajamaki HK (2006) Sensitivity of routine 1.0-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging versus arthroscopy as gold standard in fresh traumatic chondral lesions of the knee in young adults. Arthroscopy 22:1033–1039PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Vaz CE, Camargo OP, Santana PJ, Valezi AC (2005) Accuracy of magnetic resonance in identifying traumatic. Clinics 60:445–450PubMedCrossRef Vaz CE, Camargo OP, Santana PJ, Valezi AC (2005) Accuracy of magnetic resonance in identifying traumatic. Clinics 60:445–450PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Van Dyck P, Gielen J, D’Anvers J, Vanhoenacker F, Dossche L, Van Gestel J, Parizel PM (2007) MR diagnosis of meniscal tears of the knee: analysis of error patterns. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 127:849–854PubMedCrossRef Van Dyck P, Gielen J, D’Anvers J, Vanhoenacker F, Dossche L, Van Gestel J, Parizel PM (2007) MR diagnosis of meniscal tears of the knee: analysis of error patterns. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 127:849–854PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Makdissi M, Eriksson KO, Morris HG, Young DA (2006) MRI-negative bucket-handle tears of the lateral meniscus in athletes: a case series. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:1012–1016PubMedCrossRef Makdissi M, Eriksson KO, Morris HG, Young DA (2006) MRI-negative bucket-handle tears of the lateral meniscus in athletes: a case series. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:1012–1016PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Mosher TJ (2006) Musculoskeletal imaging at 3T: Current techniques and future applications. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 14:63–76PubMedCrossRef Mosher TJ (2006) Musculoskeletal imaging at 3T: Current techniques and future applications. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 14:63–76PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Pakin SK, Cavalcanti C, La Rocca R, Schweitzer ME, Regatte RR (2006) Ultra-high-field MRI of knee joint at 7.0T: preliminary experience. Acad Radiol 13:1135–1142PubMedCrossRef Pakin SK, Cavalcanti C, La Rocca R, Schweitzer ME, Regatte RR (2006) Ultra-high-field MRI of knee joint at 7.0T: preliminary experience. Acad Radiol 13:1135–1142PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Abramowitz M, Stegun I (1970) Handbook of mathematical functions 9th edn, Dover publications, Inc. p 932 Abramowitz M, Stegun I (1970) Handbook of mathematical functions 9th edn, Dover publications, Inc. p 932
9.
go back to reference Sano RM (1988) NEMA standards. Performance standards for clinical magnetic resonance systems. In: Dixon RL (ed) MRI acceptance testing and quality control - the role of the clinical medical physicist. Medical Physics Publishing Corp, Madison, WI, pp 185–189 Sano RM (1988) NEMA standards. Performance standards for clinical magnetic resonance systems. In: Dixon RL (ed) MRI acceptance testing and quality control - the role of the clinical medical physicist. Medical Physics Publishing Corp, Madison, WI, pp 185–189
10.
go back to reference Yang Y, Gu H, Zhan W, Xu S, Silbersweig DA, Stern E (2002) Simultaneous perfusion and BOLD imaging using reverse spiral scanning at 3T: characterization of functional contrast and susceptibility artifacts. Magn Reson Med 48:278–289PubMedCrossRef Yang Y, Gu H, Zhan W, Xu S, Silbersweig DA, Stern E (2002) Simultaneous perfusion and BOLD imaging using reverse spiral scanning at 3T: characterization of functional contrast and susceptibility artifacts. Magn Reson Med 48:278–289PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Niitsu M, Nakai T, Ikeda K, Tang GY, Yoshioka H, Itai YK (2000) High resolution MR Imaging of the knee at 3.0T: comparison of SPGR and SSFP sequences. Acta Radiol 41:84–88PubMedCrossRef Niitsu M, Nakai T, Ikeda K, Tang GY, Yoshioka H, Itai YK (2000) High resolution MR Imaging of the knee at 3.0T: comparison of SPGR and SSFP sequences. Acta Radiol 41:84–88PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Kornaat PR, Reeder SB, Koo S, Brittain JH, Yu H, Andriacchi TP, Gold GE (2005) MR imaging of articular cartilage at 1.5T and 3.0T: comparison of SPGR and SSFP sequences. Osteoarthr Cartil 13:338–344PubMedCrossRef Kornaat PR, Reeder SB, Koo S, Brittain JH, Yu H, Andriacchi TP, Gold GE (2005) MR imaging of articular cartilage at 1.5T and 3.0T: comparison of SPGR and SSFP sequences. Osteoarthr Cartil 13:338–344PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Gold GE, Reeder SB, Yu H, Kornaat P, Shimakawa AS, Johnson JW, Pelc NJ, Beaulieu CF, Brittain JH (2006) Articular cartilage of the knee: rapid three-dimensional MR imaging at 3.0 T with IDEAL balanced steady-state free precession-initial experience. Radiology 240:546–551PubMedCrossRef Gold GE, Reeder SB, Yu H, Kornaat P, Shimakawa AS, Johnson JW, Pelc NJ, Beaulieu CF, Brittain JH (2006) Articular cartilage of the knee: rapid three-dimensional MR imaging at 3.0 T with IDEAL balanced steady-state free precession-initial experience. Radiology 240:546–551PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Gold GE, Han E, Stainsby J, Wright G, Brittain J, Beaulieu C (2004) Musculosceletal MRI at 3.0 T: Relaxation times and image contrast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:343–351PubMed Gold GE, Han E, Stainsby J, Wright G, Brittain J, Beaulieu C (2004) Musculosceletal MRI at 3.0 T: Relaxation times and image contrast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:343–351PubMed
15.
go back to reference Eckstein F, Charles C, Buck RJ, Kraus VB, Remmers AE, Hudelmaier M, Wirth W, Evel JL (2005) Accuracy and Precision of Quantitative Assessment of Cartilage Morphology by Magnetic Resonance Imaging at 3.0T. Arthritis Rheum 52:3132–3136PubMedCrossRef Eckstein F, Charles C, Buck RJ, Kraus VB, Remmers AE, Hudelmaier M, Wirth W, Evel JL (2005) Accuracy and Precision of Quantitative Assessment of Cartilage Morphology by Magnetic Resonance Imaging at 3.0T. Arthritis Rheum 52:3132–3136PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Pruessmann KP, Weiger M, Scheidegger MB, Boesiger P (1999) SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fast MRI. Magn Reson Med 42:952–962PubMedCrossRef Pruessmann KP, Weiger M, Scheidegger MB, Boesiger P (1999) SENSE: sensitivity encoding for fast MRI. Magn Reson Med 42:952–962PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Kellman P, McVeigh ER (2005) Image reconstruction in SNR units: A general method for SNR measurement. Magn Reson Med 54:1439–1447PubMedCrossRef Kellman P, McVeigh ER (2005) Image reconstruction in SNR units: A general method for SNR measurement. Magn Reson Med 54:1439–1447PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Sijbers J, Scheunders P, Bonnet N, Van Dyck D, Raman E (1996) Quantification and improvement of the signal-to-noise-ratio in a magnetic resonance image acquisition procedure. Magn Reson Imaging 14:1157–1163PubMedCrossRef Sijbers J, Scheunders P, Bonnet N, Van Dyck D, Raman E (1996) Quantification and improvement of the signal-to-noise-ratio in a magnetic resonance image acquisition procedure. Magn Reson Imaging 14:1157–1163PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Murphy BW, Carson PL, Ellis JH, Zhang YT, Hyde RJ, Chenevert TL (1993) Signal-to-noise measures for magnetic resonance imagers. Magn Reson Imaging 11:425–428PubMedCrossRef Murphy BW, Carson PL, Ellis JH, Zhang YT, Hyde RJ, Chenevert TL (1993) Signal-to-noise measures for magnetic resonance imagers. Magn Reson Imaging 11:425–428PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Comparison of image quality in magnetic resonance imaging of the knee at 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla using 32-channel receiver coils
Authors
F. Schoth
N. Kraemer
T. Niendorf
C. Hohl
R. W. Gunther
G. A. Krombach
Publication date
01-10-2008
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 10/2008
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-0972-3

Other articles of this Issue 10/2008

European Radiology 10/2008 Go to the issue