Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Abdominal MR imaging at 3T.

Elmar M Merkle1, Brian M Dale, Erik K Paulson

  • 1Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710, USA. elmar.merkle@duke.edu

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics of North America
|March 15, 2006
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Energy-Efficient Usage of CT Scanners Through Mathematically Optimized Examination Scheduling.

Journal of imaging informatics in medicine·2026
Same author

AI-Based Opportunistic CT Risk Assessment Using TotalSegmentator in Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures.

Journal of imaging informatics in medicine·2026
Same author

Accelerated free-breathing volumetric liver proton density fat fraction (PDFF) and <math><mmultiscripts><mi>R</mi> <mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow> <mrow><mrow></mrow> <mo>∗</mo></mrow></mmultiscripts></math> quantification in pediatric patients using stack-of-radial MRI with multidimensional regularized reconstruction: a retrospective study.

Magma (New York, N.Y.)·2026
Same author

Automated detection of gallbladder stones using a deep learning algorithm on computed tomography scans.

Abdominal radiology (New York)·2026
Same author

CT Energy Consumption Savings From a Rapid-Reactivation Power-Save Mode for Interexamination Idle Periods.

AJR. American journal of roentgenology·2025
Same author

The carbon footprint of modern imaging.

Current opinion in urology·2025
Same journal

Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance: Innovation, Integration, and Clinical Impact.

Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America·2026
Same journal

Advances and Innovations in Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance.

Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America·2026
Same journal

The Future of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance: Navigating Ultra-High and Low-Field Imaging (Part 2).

Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America·2026
Same journal

Artificial Intelligence Applications in Cardiac MR Imaging.

Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America·2026
Same journal

Climate Change and Globally Sustainable Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance.

Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America·2026
Same journal

Strain Imaging in Heart Failure.

Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America·2026
See all related articles

Body MR imaging at 3 Tesla (3T) offers benefits like improved fat-water separation but presents challenges. Radiologists must understand physics-based limitations, such as increased artifacts and specific safety concerns, for optimal patient outcomes.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Imaging
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging
  • Physics

Background:

  • Body MR imaging at 3 Tesla (3T) is an emerging technology with potential for significant advancements.
  • Current understanding of 3T MR imaging is limited, necessitating awareness of physics-based limitations.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To outline the advantages and limitations of body MR imaging at 3T.
  • To inform radiologists about the physical principles affecting image quality and safety at ultra-high field strengths.

Main Methods:

  • Review of physics principles governing MR imaging at 3T.
  • Analysis of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and artifact characteristics at 3T compared to 1.5T.
  • Evaluation of specific applications and patient populations for 3T body MR imaging.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • 3T offers less than twofold SNR gain without protocol changes due to increased T1 relaxation.
  • T2-weighted sequences show greater SNR gains than T1-weighted at 3T.
  • Chemical shift and susceptibility artifacts are amplified at 3T, while standing wave and conductivity effects become more prominent, especially in pregnant patients.

Conclusions:

  • 3T MR imaging provides benefits like enhanced MR spectroscopy and fat suppression.
  • Certain applications, such as fetal imaging and patients with ascites, are not well-suited for 3T due to artifacts and safety concerns.
  • Most patients can undergo abdominal MR imaging at 3T with acceptable image quality, provided limitations are understood and managed.