Enhancement effects and relaxivities of gadolinium-DTPA at 1.5 versus 3 Tesla: A phantom study

Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 145-149

  Sasaki, Makoto ^a   Shibata, Eri ^a   Kanbara, Yoshiyuki ^a   Ehara, Shigeru ^a  

^a IWATE MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Contrast agent; Field strength; Gd DTPA; High field MRI; Relaxivity

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE;

ARTICLE; IMAGE QUALITY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; SIGNAL PROCESSING;

CONTRAST MEDIA; GADOLINIUM DTPA; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;

EID: 33745006002     PISSN: 13473182     EISSN: 18802206     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2463/mrms.4.145     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Sasaki M, Inoue T, Tohyama K, et al. High-field MRI of the central nervous system: current approaches to clinical and microscopic imaging. Magn Reson Med Sci 2003; 2:133-139.
2. Norris DG. High field human imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003; 18:519-529. Erratum in: J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004; 19:513.
3. 2 measurements on a 1.5-T commercial MR imager. Radiology 1989; 171:273-276.
4. Wansapura JP, Holland SK, Dunn RS, Ball WS Jr. NMR relaxation times in the human brain at 3.0 Tesla. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 9:531-538.
5. Fischer HW, Rinck PA, Van Haverbeke Y, Muller RN. Nuclear relaxation of human brain gray and white matter: analysis of field dependence and implications for MRI. Magn Reson Med 1990; 16:317-334.
6. Noebauer-Huhmann IM, Ba-Ssalamah A, Mlynarik V, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging contrast enhancement of brain tumors at 3 Tesla versus 1.5 Tesla. Invest Radiol 2002; 37:114-119.
7. Trattnig S, Ba-Ssalamah A, Noebauer-Huhmann IM, et al. MR contrast agent at high-field MRI (3 Tesla). Top Magn Reson Imaging 2003; 14: 365-375.
8. Elster AD. Field-strength dependence of gadolinium enhancement: theory and implications. AJNR Am J Roentgenol 1994; 15:1420-1423.
9. Watson AD, Rocklage SM, Carvlin MJ. Contrast agents, In: Stark DD, Bradley WG, eds. Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 2nd ed, St. Louis: Mosby, 1992; 372-437.
10. Donahue KM, Burstein D, Manning WJ, Gray ML. Studies of Gd-DTPA relaxivity and proton exchange rates in tissues. Magn Reson Med 1994; 32:66-76.
11. Stanisz GJ, Henkelman RM. Gd-DTPA relaxivity depends on macromolecular content. Magn Reson Med 2000; 44:665-667.
12. Rinck PA, Muller RN. Field strength and dose dependence of contrast enhancement by gadoliniumbased MR contrast agents. Eur Radiol 1999; 9:998-1004.
13. Reichenbach JR, Hacklander T, Harth T, Hofer M, Rassek M, Modder U. 1H T-1 and T-2 measurements of the MR imaging contrast agents Gd-DTPA and Gd-DTPA BMA at 1.5T. Eur Radiol 1997; 7:264-274.
14. 3+: relaxivities as a function of molecular weight and conjugation efficiency. Magn Reson Imaging 1992; 10: 913-917.
15. 1 relaxivity in brain tissue in vivo is lower than in saline. Magn Reson Med 2005; 53:35-40.
16. Rinck PA, Fischer HW, Vander Elst L, VanHaverbeke Y, Muller RN. Field-cycling relaxometry: medical applications. Radiology 1988; 168:843-849.
17. Hoult DI, Phil D. Sensitivity and power deposition in a high-field imaging experiment. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 12:46-67.