Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 29, 2026

Registered Bioimaging of Nanomaterials for Diagnostic and Therapeutic Monitoring
Published on: December 9, 2010
Quantitative, Organ-Specific Interscanner and Intrascanner Variability for 3 T Whole-Body Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Christopher L Schlett1, Thomas Hendel, Jochen Hirsch
1From the *Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg; †Department of Clinical Radiology, Campus Grosshadern, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich; ‡Fraunhofer Institute for Medical Image Computing MEVIS, Bremen; §Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine, Jülich Research Centre, Jülich; ∥Department of Cardiology and Nephrology, HELIOS Clinic Berlin Buch, Berlin; ¶Institute for Community Medicine, Ernst-Moritz-Arndt University, Greifswald; #Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Hospital Essen, Essen; **Institute of Diagnostic Radiology, and ††Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg; ‡‡Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen; §§Department of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research, Braunschweig; ∥∥Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hannover Medical School, Hannover; ¶¶O. Vogt Institute for Brain Research, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf; ##Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich; ***Department of Radiology and Neuroradiology,University Medicine Greifswald, Ernst-Moritz-Arndt University, Greifswald; and †††Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Introduction:
Whole-body magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is increasingly implemented in population-based cohorts and clinical settings. However, to quantify the variability introduced by the different scanners is essential to make conclusions about clinical and biological data, and relevant for internal/external validity. Thus, we determined the interscanner and intrascanner variability of different 3 T MR scanners for whole-body imaging.
Methods:
Thirty volunteers were enrolled to undergo multicentric, interscanner as well intrascanner imaging as part of the German National Cohort pilot studies. A comprehensive whole-body MR protocol was installed at 9 sites including 7 different MR scanner models by all 4 major vendors. A set of quantitative, organ-specific measures (n = 20; eg, volume of brain's gray/white matter, pulmonary trunk diameter, vertebral body height) were obtained in blinded fashion. Reproducibility was determined using mean weighted relative differences and intraclass correlation coefficients.
Results:
All participants (44 ± 14 years, 50% female) successfully completed the imaging protocol except for two because of technical issues. Mean scan time was 2 hours and 32 minutes and differed significantly across scanners (range, 1 hour 59 minutes to 3 hours 12 minutes). A higher reproducibility of obtained measurements was observed for intrascanner than for interscanner comparisons (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.80 ± 0.17 vs 0.60 ± 0.31, P = 0.005, respectively). In the interscanner comparison, mean relative difference ranged from 1.0% to 53.2%. Conversely, in the intrascanner comparison, mean relative difference ranged from 0.1% to 15.6%. There were no statistical differences for intrascanner and interscanner reproducibility between the different organ foci (all P ≥ 0.24).
Conclusions:
While whole-body MR imaging-derived, organ-specific parameters are generally associated with good to excellent reproducibility, smaller differences are obtained when using identical MR scanner models by a single vendor.
Related Concept Videos
Imaging Studies IV: Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Imaging Studies III: Computed Tomography
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Imaging Studies II: Positron Emission Tomography and Scintigraphy
Fundamental Principles of PET
Radiological Investigation II: MRI and Ventilation Perfusion Scan
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Ventilation Perfusion Scans are two radiological investigations that offer detailed diagnostic images of the body, particularly lung structures.
MRI
MRI uses magnetic fields and radiofrequency signals to distinguish between normal and abnormal tissues. This technology provides a more detailed diagnostic image than CT scans, enabling it to characterize pulmonary nodules, stage bronchogenic carcinoma, and evaluate inflammatory activity in...

