JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Optimization of Flip Angle at Head & Neck MR Angiography using Gadoteridol
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Optimization of Flip Angle at Head & Neck MR Angiography using Gadoteridol
Jeong, Hyunkeun; Kim, Mingi; Song, Jaejun; Nam, Kichang; Choi, Hyunsung; Jeong, Hyundo; Kim, Hochul;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
In this research, we tried to suggest moderate FA(Flip Angle) for CE(Contrast Enhnaced)-Head&Neck MR Angiography with Gadoteridol. For this study, we did test MR phantom and clinical study according to FA change. After that, quantitative analysis was progressed. The results of MR phantom study were as follow: RSP(Reaction Starting Point)was recorded within 300~400 mmol. MPSI(Max Peak Signal Intensity) was 2,086, 3,705, 5,109, 6,194, 7.096, 7,192 [a.u]. MPP(Max Peak Point) was shown at 30, 50, 50, 40, 50, 40 mmol. IRMPSI(Increase Rate of MPSI) was 77.6%, 37.9%, 21.2%, 14.6%, 1.4% as increasing of FA. The results of clinical study were as follow SICB(Signal Intensity of Carotid artery Bifurcation) was recorded respectively 392.5, 4165.2, 4270, 3502.2, 3263.7, 3119.6 [a.u]. ORA(Occurence Rate of Artifact) was increased as 0, 0, 20, 40, 50, 70%. According to this research, we are not only able to assure that increase of FA can be effect on H1 spin`s SI(Signal Intensity) which was combined with gadolinium agent, but also be effect on artifact rate in blood vessel. In clinical field, we expect that CE-Head&Neck MR Angiography can be performed in a practical way with this research.
 Keywords
Gadoteridol;Flip Angle;Head & Neck MRA;Carotid Artery;Gadolinium;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
 References
1.
HK. Jeong, H. Jung, and H. Kim, "Quantitative Analysis of GBCA Reaction by Mol Concentration Change on MRI Sequence", The Institute of Electronics and Information Engineers, vol.52, No.2, pp.182-192, Feb, 2015. crossref(new window)

2.
HK. Jeong, H. Jung, K. Nam and H. Kim, "Gadoteridol's Signal Change according to TR, TE Parameters in T1 Image", The Institute of Electronics and Information Engineers, vol.52, No.9, pp.117-124, Sep, 2015.

3.
HK. Jeong, H. Jung, K. Nam, G. Jang and H. Kim, "Comparative Analysis of Quantitative Signal Intensity between 1.0 mol and 0.5 mol MR Contrast Agent", The Institute of Electronics and Information Engineers, vol.52, No.12, pp.134-141, Dec, 2015. crossref(new window)

4.
E. Hagberg, and K. Scheffler, "Effect of r(1) and r(2) relaxivity of gadolinium-based contrast agents on the T(1)-weighted MR signal at increasing magnetic field strengths", ContrastMedia MolImaging, vol.8 no.6, pp.456-65, Nov-Dec, 2013.

5.
Z. Seidl, J. Vymazal, M. Mechl, M. Goyal, M. Herman, C. Colosimo, M. Pasowicz, R. Yeung, B. Paraniak-Gieszczyk, B. Yemen, N. Anzalone, A. Citterio, G. Schneider, S. Bastianello, and J. Ruscalleda, "Does higher gadolinium concentration play a role in the morphologic assessment of brain tumors? Results of a multicenter intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobutrol versus gadobenate dimeglumine(the MERIT Study)", AJNRAmJNeuroradiol, vol.33, no.6, pp.1050-8, Jun, 2012.

6.
H. S. Thomsen, S. K. Morcos, T. Almen, M. F. Bellin, M. Bertolotto, G. Bongartz, O. Clement, P. Leander, G. Heinz-Peer, P. Reimer, F. Stacul, A. van der Molen, J. A. Webb, and E. C. M. S. Committee, "Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis and gadolinium-based contrast media: updated ESUR Contrast Medium Safety Committee guidelines", EurRadiol, vol.23, no.2, pp.307-18, Feb, 2013.

7.
F. G. Shellock, and A. Spinazzi, "MRI safety update 2008: part 1, MRI contrast agents and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis", AJRAm JRoentgenol, vol.191, no.4, pp.1129-39, Oct, 2008.

8.
M. J. Sharafuddin, A. H. Stolpen, S. Sun, C. R. Leusner, A. A. Safvi, J. J. Hoballah, W. J. Sharp, and J. D. Corson, "High-resolution multiphase contrast-enhanced three- dimensional MR angiography compared with two-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography for the identification of pedal vessels," JVascInterv Radiol, vol.13, no.7, pp.695-702, Jul, 2002.