Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Breast MRI at 7 Tesla Utilizing a Single-loop Coil. A Feasibility Trial

Academic Radiology

Volumn 17, Issue 8, 2010, Pages 1050-1056

  Umutlu, Lale ^a,b   Maderwald, Stefan ^a,b   Kraff, Oliver ^a,b   Theysohn, Jens M ^a,b   Kuemmel, Sherko ^a   Hauth, Elke A ^a,b   Forsting, Michael ^a,b   Antoch, Gerald ^a,b   Ladd, Mark E ^a,b   Quick, Harald H ^a,b   Lauenstein, Thomas C ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ESSEN   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF DUISBURG ESSEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Breast imaging; Breast MRI; High field breast MRI; Ultra high field imaging

Indexed keywords

GADOBUTROL;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BODY POSTURE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST LESION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC KIT; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HUMAN; MAGNETIC FIELD; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SINGLE LOOP COIL; SUPERCONDUCTOR;

ADULT; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; PRONE POSITION;

EID: 77954209733     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2010.03.017     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. El Yousef S.J., Duchesneau R.H., Alfidi R.J., et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Work in progress. Radiology 1984, 150:761-766.
2. Kuhl C.K. Breast MR imaging at 3T. Magnet Res Imaging Clin N Am 2007, 15:315-320.
3. Pinker K., Grabner G., Bogner W., et al. A combined high temporal and high spatial resolution 3 Tesla MR imaging protocol for the assessment of breast lesions initial results. Invest Radiol 2009, 44:553-558.
4. Kuhl C.K., Jost P., Morakkabati N., et al. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast at 3.0 and 1.5 T in the same patients: initial experience. Radiology 2006, 239:666-676.
5. Kuhl C.K., Kooijman H., Gieseke J., et al. Effect of B1 inhomogeneity on breast MR imaging at 3.0 T. Radiology 2007, 244:929-930.
6. Kollia K., Maderwald S., Putzki N., et al. First clinical study on ultra-high-field MR imaging in patients with multiple sclerosis: comparison of 1.5T and 7T. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009, 30:699-702.
7. Maderwald S., Ladd S., Gizewski E., et al. To TOF or not to TOF: strategies for non-contrast-enhanced intracranial MRA at 7 T. Magnet Res Materials Phys Biol Med 2008, 21:159-167.
8. Mönninghoff C., Maderwald S., Theysohn J.M., et al. Evaluation of intracranial aneurysms with 7 T versus 1.5 T time-of-flight MR angiography; initial experience. Beurteilung von intrakraniellen Hirnarterienaneurysmen mit 7 Tesla versus 1,5 Tesla-time-of-flight-MR-Angiografie. erste Erfahrungen 2009, 181:16-23.
9. Snyder C.J., DelaBarre L.J., Metzger P., et al. Initial results of cardiac imaging at 7 tesla. Magnet Res Med 2009, 61:517-524.
10. Vaughan J.T., Snyder C.J., DelaBarre L.J., et al. Whole-body imaging at 7T: preliminary results. Magn Reson Med 2009, 61:244-248.
11. Hecht E.M., Lee R.F., Taouli B., et al. Perspectives on body MR imaging at ultrahigh field. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2007, 15:449-465.
12. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Atlas (BI-RADS- MRI) 2003, American College of Radiology, American College of Radiology, Reston, VA.
13. Dietrich O., Raya J.G., Reeder S.B., et al. Measurement of signal-to-noise ratios in MR images: influence of multichannel coils, parallel imaging, and reconstruction filters. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007, 26:375-385.
14. Kraff O., Theysohn J.M., Maderwald S., et al. High-Resolution MRI of the Human Parotid Gland and Duct at 7 Tesla. Investigative Radiol 2009, 44:518-524.
15. Merkle E.M., Dale B.M. Abdominal MRI at 3.0 T: the basics revisited. Am J Roentgenol 2006, 186:1524-1532.
16. Azlan C.A., Di Giovanni P., Ahearn T.S., et al. B1 transmission-field inhomogeneity and enhancement ratio errors in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) of the breast at 3T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010, 31:234-239.
17. Akisik F.M., Sandrasegaran K., Aisen A.M., et al. Abdominal MR imaging at 3.0 T. Radiographics 2007, 27:1433-1444.
18. Berg W.A., Gutierrez L., NessAiver M.S., et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 2004, 233:830-849.
19. Bernstein M.A., Huston J., Ward H.A. Imaging artifacts at 3.0T. J Magnet Res Imaging 2006, 24:735-746.
20. Hatakenaka M., Soeda H., Yabuuchi H., et al. Apparent diffusion coefficients of breast tumors: clinical application. Magnet Res Med Sci 2008, 7:23-29.
21. Sinha S., Sinha U. Recent advances in breast MRI and MRS. NMR Biomed 2008, 22:3-16.
22. Mountford C.L.C., Malycha P., Russell P. Proton spectroscopy provides accurate pathology on biopsy and in vivo. J Magnet Res Imaging 2006, 24:459-477.
23. Bolan P.J., Meisamy S., Baker E.H., et al. In vivo quantification of choline compounds in the breast with 1H MR spectroscopy. Magnet Res Med 2003, 50:1134-1143.
24. Bartella L., Huang W. Proton (1H) MR spectroscopy of the breast. Radiographics 2007, 27:S241-S252.
25. Meisamy S., Bolan P.J., Baker E.H., et al. Adding in vivo quantitative 1H MR spectroscopy to improve diagnostic accuracy of breast MR imaging: preliminary results of observer performance study at 4.0 T. Radiology 2005, 236:465-475.