The objective of this study was to compare image quality and patient acceptance of a dedicated .2-T MR system and a 1.0-T whole body system. Forty-one consecutive patients referred for MRI of the foot or ankle were prospectively examined with a dedicated .2-T low field system and a 1.0-T whole body system. Images were evaluated qualitatively by two observers and quantitatively using signal-difference-to-noise ratios. The patients were interviewed with respect to positioning, examination time, noise, claustrophobia, confidence in the diagnosis, and willingness to repeat the examination, using a questionnaire. The qualitative score was significantly higher for the 1.0-T system (2.6 vs 2.2 for reader 1 [P = .008] and 2.6 vs 1.7 for reader 2 [P < .0001]), respectively). The signal-difference-to-noise ratios were also superior for the 1.0-T MR system (2.96 vs .88, P < .0001). However, 96% of the lesions visualized at 1.0 T were also detected with the low field system. Patient acceptance was significantly better for the 1.0-T MR scanner (48.6 vs 43.9, P = .007). Image quality of the dedicated low field system was inferior to the 1.0-T system using objective parameters, and patients did not prefer the low field system. Although only 4% of lesions were missed in this series, the low field MR system can only be recommended when funding is limited and the available space is limited.
CTA has a high degree of accuracy for the assessment of carotid artery disease compared with catheter angiography. Interactive VR increases the accuracy of diagnosing carotid stenosis and decreases the number of unsatisfactory studies as compared with MIP. Further advances in computation speeds and improvements in software may dramatically alter the future use of VR for the communication of results to clinicians; however, careful analysis of transverse sections is essential to accurate CT interpretation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.