Effect of injection rate on contrast-enhanced MR angiography image quality: Modulation transfer function analysis

8Citations
Citations of this article
21Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Purpose: Contrast-enhanced (CE)-MRA optimization involves interactions of sequence duration, bolus timing, contrast recirculation, and both R1 relaxivity and R2*-related reduction of signal. Prior data suggest superior image quality with slower gadolinium injection rates than typically used. Methods: A computer-based model of CE-MRA was developed, with contrast injection, physiologic, and image acquisition parameters varied over a wide gamut. Gadolinium concentration was derived using Verhoeven's model with recirculation, R1 and R2* calculated at each time point, and modulation transfer curves used to determine injection rates, resulting in optimal resolution and image contrast for renal and carotid artery CE-MRA. Validation was via a vessel stenosis phantom and example patients who underwent carotid CE-MRA with low effective injection rates. Results: Optimal resolution for renal and carotid CE-MRA is achieved with injection rates between 0.5 to 0.9 mL/s and 0.2 to 0.3 mL/s, respectively, dependent on contrast volume. Optimal image contrast requires slightly faster injection rates. Expected signal-to-noise ratio varies with both contrast volume and cardiac output. Simulated vessel phantom and clinical carotid CE-MRA exams at an effective contrast injection rate of 0.4 to 0.5 mL/s demonstrate increased resolution. Conclusion: Optimal image resolution is achieved at intuitively low, effective injection rates (0.2–0.9 mL/s, dependent on imaging parameters and contrast injection volume). Magn Reson Med 78:357–369, 2017. © 2016 International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Clark, T. J., Wilson, G. J., & Maki, J. H. (2017). Effect of injection rate on contrast-enhanced MR angiography image quality: Modulation transfer function analysis. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 78(1), 357–369. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.26349

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free