To evaluate the tradeoffs between temporal and spatial resolution and contrast dosing in dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA).
Bilateral carotid artery aneurysms were created in a swine model. Dynamic CE-MRA using 1 mol/L gadobutrol was performed at 3 T, with high temporal (high-temp), middle temporal (mid-temp), and low temporal (low-temp) resolutions. High temporal CE-MRA was performed twice using 1 mL and 2 mL gadobutrol (2 mL/s). Middle temporal and low-temp sequences were performed once with 2 mL gadobutrol (2 mL/s). The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was quantitatively assessed. Blinded reads were used to qualitatively evaluate contrast dose and image quality.
The mean SNRs of high-temp, mid-temp, and low-temp resolutions were 56.7, 47.5, and 48.1. There was no significant difference between the 3 sequences with 2 mL gadobutrol. The mean SNR of the high-temp resolution with 2 mL was significantly higher than that with 1 mL (56.7 vs 39.9). In qualitative analysis, the 3 temporal sequences with 2 mL gadobutrol showed no significant differences regarding overall image quality and diagnostic value. High temporal resolution with 2 mL consistently showed the superiority of image quality than that with 1 mL.
High temporal dynamic CE-MRA with 2 mL (0.04 mmol/kg body weight) gadobutrol can produce consistently superior image quality over that with 1 mL (0.02 mmol/kg body weight). For a given contrast dose, the tradeoffs between temporal and spatial resolution will not result in significant differences in image quality in TWIST (time-resolved angiography with interleaved stochastic trajectories).
From the *Department of Radiology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China; and †Department of Radiology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX.
Received for publication August 19, 2012; accepted October 1, 2012.
Reprints: Xiaoming Li, MD, PhD, Radiology Department, Tongji Hospital, 1095 Jiefang Ave, Qiaokou District, Wuhan, China 430030 (e-mail: email@example.com).
The authors do not have conflicts of interest.