000132493 001__ 132493
000132493 005__ 20240229105019.0
000132493 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1177/0284185117718399
000132493 0247_ $$2pmid$$apmid:28691526
000132493 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a0001-6926
000132493 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a0284-1851
000132493 0247_ $$2ISSN$$a1600-0455
000132493 037__ $$aDKFZ-2018-00180
000132493 041__ $$aeng
000132493 082__ $$a610
000132493 1001_ $$aLaader, Anja$$b0
000132493 245__ $$aNon-enhanced versus low-dose contrast-enhanced renal magnetic resonance angiography at 7 T: a feasibility study.
000132493 260__ $$aLondon$$bSage$$c2018
000132493 3367_ $$2DRIVER$$aarticle
000132493 3367_ $$2DataCite$$aOutput Types/Journal article
000132493 3367_ $$0PUB:(DE-HGF)16$$2PUB:(DE-HGF)$$aJournal Article$$bjournal$$mjournal$$s1521206850_1744
000132493 3367_ $$2BibTeX$$aARTICLE
000132493 3367_ $$2ORCID$$aJOURNAL_ARTICLE
000132493 3367_ $$00$$2EndNote$$aJournal Article
000132493 520__ $$aBackground Considering the currently reported association between a repetitive application and cumulative dosage of Gadolinium (Gd)-based contrast agents and Gd-deposition in brain tissue as well as the risk for the advent of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF), techniques allowing for a dose reduction become an important key aspect aside from non-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) techniques. Thus, this study was focused on the reduction and/or complete omission of contrast agent for renal MRA at 7T. Purpose To evaluate the performance of time-of-flight MRA versus low-dose contrast-enhanced (CE) renal MRA at 7T. Material and Methods Ten healthy volunteers were examined on a 7T MR system comprising a TOF MRA and three-dimensional (3D) fast low angle shot spoiled gradient-echo sequence (FLASH) MRA after administration of one-quarter of clinical dose of gadobutrol. Qualitative image analysis was performed including overall image quality, artery delineation and presence of artifacts. Contrast ratio (CR), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of the renal arteries were calculated. Results TOF MRA and low-CE MRA achieved comparable overall ratings, with slightly superior delineation of the main renal arteries in TOF MRA (TOF = 3.10 ± 0.75, low-CE = 2.95 ± 0.75). Segmental branches outside and inside the parenchyma were delineated significantly better on TOF MRA. Quantitative analysis demonstrated the superiority of TOF MRA, yielding higher scores for CR, SNR, and CNR. Conclusion The initial results of our study demonstrate the feasibility and comparable diagnostic performance of TOF and low-dose CE renal MRA at 7T.
000132493 536__ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315$$a315 - Imaging and radiooncology (POF3-315)$$cPOF3-315$$fPOF III$$x0
000132493 588__ $$aDataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed,
000132493 650_7 $$2NLM Chemicals$$aContrast Media
000132493 7001_ $$aBeiderwellen, Karsten$$b1
000132493 7001_ $$aKraff, Oliver$$b2
000132493 7001_ $$aMaderwald, Stefan$$b3
000132493 7001_ $$0P:(DE-He78)022611a2317e4de40fd912e0a72293a8$$aLadd, Mark$$b4$$udkfz
000132493 7001_ $$aForsting, Michael$$b5
000132493 7001_ $$aUmutlu, Lale$$b6
000132493 773__ $$0PERI:(DE-600)2024579-8$$a10.1177/0284185117718399$$gVol. 59, no. 3, p. 296 - 304$$n3$$p296 - 304$$tActa radiologica$$v59$$x1600-0455$$y2018
000132493 909CO $$ooai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:132493$$pVDB
000132493 9101_ $$0I:(DE-588b)2036810-0$$6P:(DE-He78)022611a2317e4de40fd912e0a72293a8$$aDeutsches Krebsforschungszentrum$$b4$$kDKFZ
000132493 9131_ $$0G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315$$1G:(DE-HGF)POF3-310$$2G:(DE-HGF)POF3-300$$3G:(DE-HGF)POF3$$4G:(DE-HGF)POF$$aDE-HGF$$bGesundheit$$lKrebsforschung$$vImaging and radiooncology$$x0
000132493 9141_ $$y2018
000132493 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0400$$2StatID$$aAllianz-Lizenz / DFG
000132493 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0420$$2StatID$$aNationallizenz
000132493 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0300$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bMedline
000132493 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0100$$2StatID$$aJCR$$bACTA RADIOL : 2015
000132493 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0200$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bSCOPUS
000132493 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0600$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bEbsco Academic Search
000132493 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0030$$2StatID$$aPeer Review$$bASC
000132493 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0199$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bThomson Reuters Master Journal List
000132493 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0110$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index
000132493 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0150$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bWeb of Science Core Collection
000132493 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)0111$$2StatID$$aWoS$$bScience Citation Index Expanded
000132493 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)1110$$2StatID$$aDBCoverage$$bCurrent Contents - Clinical Medicine
000132493 915__ $$0StatID:(DE-HGF)9900$$2StatID$$aIF < 5
000132493 9201_ $$0I:(DE-He78)E020-20160331$$kE020$$lMedizinische Physik in der Radiologie$$x0
000132493 980__ $$ajournal
000132493 980__ $$aVDB
000132493 980__ $$aI:(DE-He78)E020-20160331
000132493 980__ $$aUNRESTRICTED