Comparing real-world advantages for the clinical neuroradiologist between a high field (3 T), a phased array (1.5 T) vs. a single-channel 1.5-T MR system

Darren B. Orbach, Chris Wu, Meng Law, James S. Babb, Ray Lee, Abraham Padua, Edmond A. Knopp

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)


Purpose: To evaluate signal-to-nolse ratio (SNR) and neuroradiologists' subjective assessments of image quality In 3-Tesla (3-T) or phased-array MR systems that are now available for clinical neuroImaging. Materials and Methods: Brain MR images of six normal volunteers were obtained on each of three scanners: a 1.5-T single-channel system, a 12-channel, phased-array system, and a 3-T single-channel system. Additionally, clinically optimized images acquired from 28 patients who underwent imaging In more than one of these systems were analyzed. SNRs were measured and image quality and artifact conspicuity were graded by two blinded readers. Results: The phased-array system produced higher SNR than either the 1.5-T or the 3-T single-channel systems, and in no instance was it outperformed. Both blinded readers judged the phased-array images to be of higher quality than those produced by the single-channel systems, with significantly less artifact. The 3-T magnet produced images with high SNR, but with increased artifact conspicuity. The phased-array system markedly decreased acquisition times without introduction of artifacts. Conclusion Both quantitatively and qualitatively, the phased-array system provided image quality superior to that of the 1.5-T and 3-T single-channel systems.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)16-24
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2006
Externally publishedYes


  • 3-T MR
  • High field MRI
  • Image quality
  • Phased-array
  • Signal-to-noise ratio

Cite this