Academic Radiology
Volume 17, Issue 4 , Pages 407-409 , April 2010

7.0 Tesla MRI: The “Field of Dreams”?

Received 18 December 2009 ,Accepted 18 December 2009.

References 

  1. Lauterbur PC. Image formation by induced local interactions: examples employing nuclear magnetic resonance. Nature. 1973;242:190–191
  2. Filler AG. The history, development and impact of computed imaging in neurological diagnosis and neurosurgery: CT, MRI, and DTI. Available at: http://precedings.nature.com/documents/3267/version/3. Accessed January 7, 2010.
  3. Hennig J. Ultra high field MR: useful instruments or toys for the boys. MAGMA. 2008;21:1–3
  4. Hu X, Norris DG. Advances in high-field magnetic resonance imaging. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2004;6:157–184
  5. Heidemann RM, Seiberlich N, Griswold MA, et al. Perspectives and limitations of parallel MR imaging at high field strengths. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2006;16:311–320
  6. Willinek WA, Kuhl CK. 3.0 T neuroimaging: technical considerations and clinical applications. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2006;16:217–228
  7. Breyer T, Wanke I, Maderwald S, et al. Imaging of patients with hippocampal sclerosis at 7 Tesla. Initial results. Acad Radiol. 2010;00:000–000
  8. Kollia K, Maderwald S, Putzki N, et al. First clinical study on ultra-high-field MR imaging in patients with multiple sclerosis: comparison of 1.5T and 7T. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009;30:699–702
  9. Kraff O, Theysohn JM, Maderwald S, et al. High-resolution MRI of the human parotid gland and duct at 7 Tesla. Invest Radiol. 2009;44:518–524
  10. Mainero C, Benner T, Radding A, et al. In vivo imaging of cortical pathology in multiple sclerosis using ultra-high field MRI. Neurology. 2009;73:941–948
  11. Schlamann M, Maderwald S, Becker W, et al. Cerebral cavernous hemangiomas at 7 Tesla initial experience. Acad Radiol. 2010;17:3–6
  12. Stahl R, Krug R, Kelley DA, et al. Assessment of cartilage-dedicated sequences at ultra-high-field MRI: comparison of imaging performance and diagnostic confidence between 3.0 and 7.0 T with respect to osteoarthritis-induced changes at the knee joint. Skeletal Radiol. 2009;38:771–783
  13. Tallantyre EC, Morgan PS, Dixon JE, et al. A comparison of 3T and 7T in the detection of small parenchymal veins within MS lesions. Invest Radiol. 2009;44:491–494
  14. Heverhagen JT, Bourekas E, Sammet S, et al. Time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography at 7 Tesla. Invest Radiol. 2008;43:568–573
  15. von Morze C, Xu D, Purcell DD, et al. Intracranial time-of-flight MR angiography at 7T with comparison to 3T. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2007;26:900–904
  16. Gardener AG, Gowland PA, Francis ST. Implementation of quantitative perfusion imaging using pulsed arterial spin labeling at ultra-high field. Magn Reson Med. 2009;61:874–882
  17. Deistung A, Rauscher A, Sedlacik J, et al. Susceptibility weighted imaging at ultra high magnetic field strengths: theoretical considerations and experimental results. Magn Reson Med. 2008;60:1155–1168
  18. Jerde TA, Lewis SM, Goerke U, et al. Ultra-high field parallel imaging of the superior parietal lobule during mental maze solving. Exp Brain Res. 2008;187:551–561
  19. Yacoub E, Shmuel A, Pfeuffer J, et al. Imaging brain function in humans at 7 Tesla. Magn Reson Med. 2001;45:588–594
  20. Hillman BJ. Noninterpretive skills for radiology residents. Critical thinking: deciding whether to incorporate the recommendations of radiology publications and presentations into practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174:943–946
  21. Redberg RF. Evidence, appropriateness, and technology assessment in cardiology: a case study of computed tomography. Health Aff (Millwood). 2007;26:86–95
  22. Iglehart JK. Health insurers and medical-imaging policy—a work in progress. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1030–1037

PII: S1076-6332(09)00677-1

doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2009.12.007

Academic Radiology
Volume 17, Issue 4 , Pages 407-409 , April 2010

Article Tools