Key result
Phase encode reordering with a 10 mm acceptance window significantly increased scan efficiency over a non-reordered 5 mm method (P<0.001) and improved image quality (P<0.05).
Why the study?
Does phase encode reordering improve scan efficiency and image quality in 3D coronary imaging compared to standard navigator acceptance window methods?
Population
In vitro and in vivo models for 3D coronary imaging
Comparison
Phase encode reordering with a 10 mm navigator… vs Non-reordered 5 mm method, acceptance-rejection…
Design
Other
Authors
Loading...
May enable efficient coronary MRA with wider windows; leaves open prospective validation before clinical use.
Does phase encode reordering improve scan efficiency and image quality in 3D coronary imaging compared to standard navigator acceptance window methods?
p-value: p=<0.001
Phase encode reordering in 3D coronary imaging allows for larger navigator acceptance windows, significantly improving scan efficiency without compromising image quality.
Jhooti et al. (1999) studied Coronary imaging. Phase encode reordering with a 10 mm navigator acceptance window vs. Non-reordered 5 mm method and retrospective respiratory gating was evaluated on Scan efficiency and image quality (p=<0.001). Phase encode reordering with a 10 mm acceptance window significantly increased scan efficiency over a non-reordered 5 mm method (P<0.001) and improved image quality (P<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: