Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 13, 2026

Time-Resolved, Dynamic Computed Tomography Angiography for Characterization of Aortic Endoleaks and Treatment Guidance via 2D-3D Fusion-Imaging
Published on: December 9, 2021
Intraindividual comparison of high-spatial-resolution abdominal MR angiography at 1.5 T and 3.0 T: initial experience
Henrik J Michaely1, Harald Kramer, Olaf Dietrich
1Institute of Clinical Radiology, University Hospitals Grosshadern, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377 Munich, Germany. henrik.michaely@med.uni-muenchen.de
Purpose:
To prospectively compare three-dimensional (3D) contrast material-enhanced abdominal magnetic resonance (MR) angiography at 1.5 and 3.0 T intraindividually in healthy volunteers.
Materials And Methods:
After institutional review board approval and informed consent were obtained, 15 healthy male volunteers (age range, 24-41 years) underwent one abdominal 3D contrast-enhanced MR angiographic examination each at 1.5 and 3.0 T in random order. Fast 3D gradient-echo sequence with parallel imaging acceleration factor of three was used for MR angiography; acquired spatial resolutions were 1x0.8x1 mm3 (imaging time, 19 seconds) at 1.5 T and 0.9x0.8x0.9 mm3 (imaging time, 18 seconds) at 3.0 T. With the latter, volume of the 3D slab was 8% larger. At 1.5 T, 20-mL bolus of gadobenate dimeglumine was delivered at 2 mL/sec; at 3.0 T, 15-mL bolus was delivered at 2.5 mL/sec. Two blinded radiologists rated image quality of aorta and proximal renal arteries in consensus with five-point scale (4=very good, 0=nondiagnostic) according to sequence and in direct intraindividual comparison. Visibility of proximal and segmental renal arteries was rated with three-point scale (3=completely visible, 1=nonvisible). Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was determined with phantoms. For statistical analysis of the SNRs, t tests were used.
Results:
All MR angiographic measurements were diagnostic. Median score for image quality at both field strengths was 4. Depiction of proximal renal arteries was rated 3 at both field strengths. The visibility of the distal renal arteries was better at 3.0 T (median score, 3) than at 1.5 T (median score, 2). With direct comparison, 3.0-T MR angiography was better in 14 of 15 cases; no field strength was preferred in the other case. Mean SNR was significantly (P<.001) higher at 3.0 T (17.8+/-0.09 [standard deviation]) than at 1.5 T (11.9+/-0.10).
Conclusion:
MR angiography at 3.0 T provided better vessel visibility and SNR than did that at 1.5 T, although voxel size and imaging time were reduced.
Related Concept Videos
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System IV: CMRI
Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System V: CT
