Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Crooks, L. E.
Right arrow Articles by Kaufman, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Crooks, L. E.
Right arrow Articles by Kaufman, L.

Radiology, Vol 151, 127-133, Copyright © 1984 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Magnetic resonance imaging: effects of magnetic field strength

LE Crooks, M Arakawa, J Hoenninger, B McCarten, J Watts and L Kaufman

Magnetic resonance images of the head, abdomen, and pelvis of normal adult men were obtained using varying magnetic field strength, and measurements of T1 and T2 relaxations and of signal-to-noise (SN) ratios were determined. The T1 relaxation of gray matter, white matter, and muscle increases and T2 decreases with field strength, while T1 of fat remains relatively constant and T2 increases. As a consequence, for any one spin echo sequence, gray/white matter contrast decreases and muscle/fat contrast increases with field. SN levels rise rapidly up to 3.0 kgauss and then change more slowly, actually dropping for muscle. The optimum field for magnetic resonance imaging depends on tissue type, body part, and imaging sequence, so that it does not have a unique value. Magnetic resonance systems that operate in the 3.0-5.0 kgauss range achieve most or all of the gains that can be achieved by higher magnetic fields.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
B. Taouli, S. Zaim, C. G. Peterfy, J. A. Lynch, A. Stork, A. Guermazi, B. Fan, K. H. Fye, and H. K. Genant
Rheumatoid Arthritis of the Hand and Wrist: Comparison of Three Imaging Techniques
Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2004; 182(4): 937 - 943.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
R. G. Steen, T. Emudianughe, G. M. Hankins, L. W. Wynn, W. C. Wang, X. Xiong, and K. J. Helton
Brain Imaging Findings in Pediatric Patients with Sickle Cell Disease
Radiology, July 1, 2003; 228(1): 216 - 225.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J Sports MedHome page
B. R. Mandelbaum, A. R. Bartolozzi, C. A. Davis, L. Teurlings, and B. Bragonier
Wrist pain syndrome in the gymnast: Pathogenetic, diagnostic, and therapeutic considerations
Am. J. Sports Med., June 1, 1989; 17(3): 305 - 317.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 ScienceHome page
T. Budinger and P. Lauterbur
Nuclear magnetic resonance technology for medical studies
Science, October 19, 1984; 226(4672): 288 - 298.
[Abstract] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1984 by the Radiological Society of North America.