• Vibhas S Deshpande, Friedrich Cavagna, Fabio Maggioni, Brian E Schirf, Reed A Omary, and Debiao Li.
• Siemens Medical Solutions, Los Angeles, California 90095, USA.Vibhas.Deshpande@siemens.com
• Invest Radiol. 2006 Mar 1; 41 (3): 292-8.

ObjectivesIntravascular contrast agents may offer longer imaging times and better vessel visualization over conventional extravascular agents for magnetic resonance coronary angiography. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of intravascular contrast (B-22956/1) on coronary visualization. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were compared in inversion-recovery (IR)-prepared FLASH (fast low-angle shot) and IR-trueFISP (true fast imaging with steady-state precession) sequences before and after contrast.Materials And MethodsNumeric simulations were performed to compare blood signals in IR-trueFISP and IR-FLASH sequences. Coronary imaging was performed in 15 swine.ResultsPostcontrast CNR was improved 23% with breathhold IR-FLASH and 55% with breathhold IR-trueFISP as compared with precontrast trueFISP. With free-breathing, long TR IR-FLASH provided 131% and 55.8% higher SNR and 132% and 58.7% increased CNR compared with IR-FLASH with shorter TR and IR-trueFISP, respectively.ConclusionIntravascular contrast agents improve CNR and vessel visualization in coronary magnetic resonance angiography with IR-FLASH and IR-trueFISP.

10 keywords...

hide…