Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: To determine the usefulness of a timing examination performed with 1 mL gadopentetate dimeglumine administered with a magnetic resonance (MR) power injector at single-dose three-dimensional (3D) MR aortography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 3D fast imaging with steady-state precession (repetition time [msec]/echo time [msec] = 5.0/2.0, with 50 degrees flip angle) was performed in 30 patients after administration of 0.1 mmol/kg gadopentetate dimeglumine. In 15 inpatients, a power injector was used and a timing examination was performed (experimental group). In 15 outpatients, manual injection was used and a timing examination was not performed (control group). In the timing examination, 1 mL gadopentetate dimeglumine was followed with 15 mL saline, both at 2 mL/sec, during axial turbo fast low-angle shot imaging (11/4.2/300 [inversion time ¿msec¿], with a 15 degrees flip angle); one image was obtained every 2 seconds for 60 seconds. Aortic signal-to-noise ratios (S/Ns) and contrast-to-noise ratios (C/Ns) were determined on images obtained in the two groups. RESULTS: In the timing examinations, aortic S/N increased significantly (902% +/- 517 [P < .001]) and was sufficient to help determine the timing of arterial enhancement. Findings on experimental images were superior to those on control images (S/N, 29.8 vs 20.5 [P = .003]; C/N, 23.8 vs 12.8 [P < .001], respectively). The time to perform procedures and calculations at the timing examination added a mean of 4.5 minutes to each examination. CONCLUSION: The combined use of a power injector and a timing examination improved S/Ns and C/Ns at breath-hold single-dose gadolinium-enhanced 3D MR aortography.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Earls et al. (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: