% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Laader:130875,
      author       = {A. Laader and K. Beiderwellen and O. Kraff and S. Maderwald
                      and K. Wrede and M. Ladd$^*$ and T. C. Lauenstein and M.
                      Forsting and H. H. Quick and K. Nassenstein and L. Umutlu},
      title        = {1.5 versus 3 versus 7 {T}esla in abdominal {MRI}: {A}
                      comparative study.},
      journal      = {PLoS one},
      volume       = {12},
      number       = {11},
      issn         = {1932-6203},
      address      = {Lawrence, Kan.},
      publisher    = {PLoS},
      reportid     = {DKFZ-2017-05951},
      pages        = {e0187528 -},
      year         = {2017},
      abstract     = {The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the
                      feasibility as well as potential impact of altered magnetic
                      field properties on image quality and potential artifacts of
                      1.5 Tesla, 3 Tesla and 7 Tesla non-enhanced abdominal
                      MRI.Magnetic Resonance (MR) imaging of the upper abdomen was
                      performed in 10 healthy volunteers on a 1.5 Tesla, a 3 Tesla
                      and a 7 Tesla MR system. The study protocol comprised a (1)
                      T1-weighted fat-saturated spoiled gradient-echo sequence (2D
                      FLASH), (2) T1-weighted fat-saturated volumetric
                      interpolated breath hold examination sequence (3D VIBE), (3)
                      T1-weighted 2D in and opposed phase sequence, (4) True fast
                      imaging with steady-state precession sequence (TrueFISP) and
                      (5) T2-weighted turbo spin-echo (TSE) sequence. For
                      comparison reasons field of view and acquisition times were
                      kept comparable for each correlating sequence at all three
                      field strengths, while trying to achieve the highest
                      possible spatial resolution. Qualitative and quantitative
                      analyses were tested for significant differences.While 1.5
                      and 3 Tesla MRI revealed comparable results in all assessed
                      features and sequences, 7 Tesla MRI yielded considerable
                      differences in T1 and T2 weighted imaging. Benefits of 7
                      Tesla MRI encompassed an increased higher spatial resolution
                      and a non-enhanced hyperintense vessel signal at 7 Tesla,
                      potentially offering a more accurate diagnosis of abdominal
                      parenchymatous and vasculature disease. 7 Tesla MRI was also
                      shown to be more impaired by artifacts, including residual
                      B1 inhomogeneities, susceptibility and chemical shift
                      artifacts, resulting in reduced overall image quality and
                      overall image impairment ratings. While 1.5 and 3 Tesla T2w
                      imaging showed equivalently high image quality, 7 Tesla
                      revealed strong impairments in its diagnostic value.Our
                      results demonstrate the feasibility and overall comparable
                      imaging ability of T1-weighted 7 Tesla abdominal MRI towards
                      3 Tesla and 1.5 Tesla MRI, yielding a promising diagnostic
                      potential for non-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Angiography
                      (MRA). 1.5 Tesla and 3 Tesla offer comparably high-quality
                      T2w imaging, showing superior diagnostic quality over 7
                      Tesla MRI.},
      cin          = {E020},
      ddc          = {500},
      cid          = {I:(DE-He78)E020-20160331},
      pnm          = {315 - Imaging and radiooncology (POF3-315)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {pmid:29125850},
      doi          = {10.1371/journal.pone.0187528},
      url          = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/130875},
}