Clinical Experience with 3.0 T MR for Cardiac Imaging in Patients: Comparison to 1.5 T using Individually Optimized Imaging Protocols

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To report our clinical experience with cardiac 3.0 T MRI in patients compared with 1.5 T using individually optimized imaging protocols. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 30 consecutive patients and 20 consecutive patients who underwent 1.5 T and 3 T cardiac MRI within 10 months. A comparison study was performed by measuring the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and the image quality (by grading each sequence on a 5-point scale, regarding the presence of artifacts). RESULTS: In morphologic and viability studies, the use of 3.0 T provided increase of the baseline SNRs and CNRs, respectively (T1: SNR 29%, p < 0.001, CNR 37%, p < 0.001; T2-SPAIR: SNR 13%, p = 0.068, CNR 18%, p = 0.059; viability imaging: SNR 45%, p = 0.017, CNR 37%, p = 0.135) without significant impairment of the image quality (T1: 3.8 +/- 0.9 vs. 3.9 +/- 0.7, p = 0.438; T2-SPAIR: 3.8 +/- 0.9 vs. 3.9 +/- 0.5, p = 0.744; viability imaging: 4.5 +/- 0.8 vs. 4.7 +/- 0.6, p = 0.254). Although the image qualities of 3.0 T functional cine images were slightly lower than those of 1.5 T images (3.6 +/- 0.7 vs. 4.2 +/- 0.6, p < 0.001), the mean SNR and CNR at 3.0 T were significantly improved (SNR 143% increase, CNR 108% increase, p < 0.001). With our imaging protocol for 3.0 T perfusion imaging, there was an insignificant decrease in the SNR (11% decrease, p = 0.172) and CNR (7% decrease, p = 0.638). However, the overall image quality was significantly improved (4.6 +/- 0.5 vs. 4.0 +/- 0.8, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: With our experience, 3.0 T MRI was shown to be feasible for the routine assessment of cardiac imaging.