Clinical and technical considerations for high quality breast MRI at 3 Tesla

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 778-790

  Rahbar, Habib ^a   Partridge, Savannah C ^a   Demartini, Wendy B ^a   Thursten, Bonnie ^a   Lehman, Constance D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

3 Tesla; breast MRI; review; technical

Indexed keywords

BENIGN TUMOR; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; BREAST CARCINOMA; BREAST EXAMINATION; BREAST FIBROADENOMA; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTRAST TO NOISE RATIO; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; DYNAMIC CONTRAST ENHANCED NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; HUMAN; IMAGE GUIDED BIOPSY; IMAGE QUALITY; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; INVASIVE CARCINOMA; MAMMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; PATIENT SAFETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

ARTIFACTS; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; DIFFUSION MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; EQUIPMENT SAFETY; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; MAMMOGRAPHY; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE;

EID: 84875435191     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: 15222586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.23834     Document Type: Review

References (37)

1. DeMartini W, Lehman C, Partridge S,. Breast MRI for cancer detection and characterization: a review of evidence-based clinical applications. Acad Radiol 2008; 15: 408-416. (Pubitemid 351384707)
2. Ikeda DM, Hylton NM, Kuhl CK, et al. BI-RADS: magnetic resonance imaging, 1st edition. In:, D'Orsi CJ, Mendelson EB, Ikeda DM, et al, editors. Breast imaging reporting and data system: ACR BI-RADS-breast imaging atlas. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2003. p 111-113.
3. Merkle EM, Dale BM,. Abdominal MRI at 3.0 T: the basics revisited. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186: 1524-1532. (Pubitemid 46112514)
4. Nnewihe AN, Grafendorfer T, Daniel BL, et al. Custom-fitted 16-channel bilateral breast coil for bidirectional parallel imaging. Magn Reson Med 2011; 66: 281-289.
5. Kuhl CK, Jost P, Morakkabati N, Zivanovic O, Schild HH, Gieseke J,. 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. (Pubitemid 43830601)
6. Kuhl CK,. Breast MR imaging at 3T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2007; 15: 315-320, vi. (Pubitemid 47430009)
7. Esserman L, Hylton N, George T, Weidner N,. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to assess tumor histopathology and angiogenesis in breast carcinoma. Breast J 1999; 5: 13-21. (Pubitemid 29108803)
8. Knopp MV, Weiss E, Sinn HP, et al. Pathophysiologic basis of contrast enhancement in breast tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10: 260-266. (Pubitemid 29463108)
9. Hylton N,. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging as an imaging biomarker. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 3293-3298. (Pubitemid 46622069)
10. Huang W, Tudorica LA, Li X, et al. Discrimination of benign and malignant breast lesions by using shutter-speed dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 2011; 261: 394-403.
11. Li X, Huang W, Yankeelov TE, Tudorica A, Rooney WD, Springer CS, Jr,. Shutter-speed analysis of contrast reagent bolus-tracking data: preliminary observations in benign and malignant breast disease. Magn Reson Med 2005; 53: 724-729. (Pubitemid 40332296)
12. 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.
13. Rakow-Penner R, Daniel B, Yu H, Sawyer-Glover A, Glover GH,. Relaxation times of breast tissue at 1.5T and 3T measured using IDEAL. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006; 23: 87-91. (Pubitemid 43100723)
14. Wiesinger F, Van de Moortele PF, Adriany G, De Zanche N, Ugurbil K, Pruessmann KP,. Potential and feasibility of parallel MRI at high field. NMR Biomed 2006; 19: 368-378. (Pubitemid 43811110)
15. Ladd ME,. High-field-strength magnetic resonance: potential and limits. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 18: 139-152. (Pubitemid 47051884)
16. Boss A, Graf H, Berger A, et al. Tissue warming and regulatory responses induced by radio frequency energy deposition on a whole-body 3-Tesla magnetic resonance imager. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007; 26: 1334-1339. (Pubitemid 350058303)
17. Rakow-Penner R, Hargreaves B, Glover GH, Daniel B,. Breast MRI at 3T. Appl Radiol 2009; 38: 6-13.
18. Nelles M, Konig RS, Gieseke J, et al. Dual-source parallel RF transmission for clinical MR imaging of the spine at 3.0 T: intraindividual comparison with conventional single-source transmission. Radiology 2010; 257: 743-753.
19. Willinek WA, Gieseke J, Kukuk GM, et al. Dual-source parallel radiofrequency excitation body MR imaging compared with standard MR imaging at 3.0 T: initial clinical experience. Radiology 2010; 256: 966-975.
20. Chang KJ, Kamel IR,. Body MR imaging at 3T: basic considerations about artifacts and safety. In:, Kamel IR, Merkle EM, editors. Body MR imaging at 3 Tesla. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011. p 1-11.
21. Azlan CA, Di Giovanni P, Ahearn TS, Semple SI, Gilbert FJ, Redpath TW,. 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.
22. Partridge SC, Rahbar H, Lehman CD,. Breast MR imaging. In:, Kamel IR, Merkle EM, editors. Body MR imaging at 3 Tesla. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011. p. 26-33.
23. Rahbar H, Partridge SC, Demartini WB, Gutierrez RL, Parsian S, Lehman CD,. Improved B(1) homogeneity of 3 tesla breast MRI using dual-source parallel radiofrequency excitation. J Magn Reson Imaging 2012; 35: 1222-1226.
24. Guo Y, Cai YQ, Cai ZL, et al. Differentiation of clinically benign and malignant breast lesions using diffusion-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002; 16: 172-178. (Pubitemid 34810055)
25. Woodhams R, Matsunaga K, Kan S, et al. ADC mapping of benign and malignant breast tumors. Magn Reson Med Sci 2005; 4: 35-42.
26. Partridge SC, DeMartini WB, Kurland BF, Eby PR, White SW, Lehman CD,. Quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging as an adjunct to conventional breast MRI for improved positive predictive value. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 193: 1716-1722.
27. Matsuoka A, Minato M, Harada M, et al. Comparison of 3.0-and 1.5-tesla diffusion-weighted imaging in the visibility of breast cancer. Radiat Med 2008; 26: 15-20. (Pubitemid 351928143)
28. Bogner W, Gruber S, Pinker K, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR for differentiation of breast lesions at 3.0 T: how does selection of diffusion protocols affect diagnosis? Radiology 2009; 253: 341-351.
29. Lo GG, Ai V, Chan JK, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of breast lesions: first experiences at 3 T. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2009; 33: 63-69.
30. El Khouli RH, Jacobs MA, Mezban SD, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging improves the diagnostic accuracy of conventional 3.0-T breast MR imaging. Radiology 2010; 256: 64-73.
31. Sinha S, Sinha U,. Recent advances in breast MRI and MRS. NMR Biomed 2009; 22: 3-16.
32. Haddadin IS, McIntosh A, Meisamy S, et al. Metabolite quantification and high-field MRS in breast cancer. NMR Biomed 2009; 22: 65-76.
33. Meisamy S, Bolan PJ, Baker EH, 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. (Pubitemid 41023427)
34. Meisamy S, Bolan PJ, Baker EH, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy of locally advanced breast cancer: predicting response with in vivo (1)H MR spectroscopy-a pilot study at 4 T. Radiology 2004; 233: 424-431. (Pubitemid 39423801)
35. Gruber S, Debski BK, Pinker K, et al. Three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopic imaging at 3 T for the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions. Radiology 2011; 261: 752-761.
36. Pinker-Domenig K, Bogner W, Gruber S, et al. High resolution MRI of the breast at 3 T: which BI-RADS(R) descriptors are most strongly associated with the diagnosis of breast cancer? Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 322-330.
37. Peters NH, Meeuwis C, Bakker CJ, et al. Feasibility of MRI-guided large-core-needle biopsy of suspiscious breast lesions at 3 T. Eur Radiol 2009; 19: 1639-1644.