| Objective：To investigate the situation of the3.0T MR coronary arteries by comparisonof the3.0T MR coronary angiography image quality before and after the injection ofcontrast agent.Methods：Application of3.0T MR, the target volume scanning methods,23healthyvolunteers underwent coronary vascular scanning. The target volume scanning is thatthe scan samplings covers a part of the heart, rather than the entire heart, or positions ofone or part of the coronary artery and scan, repeatedly position the acquisition tocomplete the entire coronary heart scan. Each volunteer is completed three coronaryscans, getting unenhanced, enhanced1min and enhanced15min three sets of images,called A, B group, C group. Calculated three sets of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) andcontrast-noise ratio (CNR), using the F-test inspection of the three groups, then pairwisecomparisons. Calculate the display rate of evaluate segment of the coronary artery inthree groups of A, B, C, using pair χ~2test to correlate analysis. Finally use SPSS17.0tostatistics the data and analyze the result. There was a statistically significant differencewhen P <0.05.Results：Were not found adverse reactions in23patients after injection of contrast agent,the successful completion of the examination. Two cases of imaging breathing unevenly,and can not hold your breath, the image can not be diagnosed, but not included in thestatistical analysis. The statistical analysis of the rows of data of the remaining21patients volunteers A, B, C three groups. The positioning operation needs about4minutes, scan with about eight minutes, the enhanced1min scanning about9minutes; enhanced15min scanning with about8minutes.A, B, C three groups image SNR differences were statistically significant (F=13.34, P<0.05); group B SNR was significantly higher than that of group A,difference wasstatistically significant (q=6.66, P <0.05); SNR of group C was higher than that ingroup A, the difference was statistically significant (q=5.92, P <0.05); B group theSNR slightly higher than the SNR of group A, but the difference was not statisticallysignificant (q=0.74,P>0.05).A, B, C three groups of image CNR difference was statistically significant (F=9.45, P<0.05); The CNR of the group B was significantly higher than that in group A CNR, thedifference was statistically significant (q=6.49, P <0.05); C group of CNR was higherthan that of the Group A, the difference was statistically significant (q=4.88, P <0.05);B group CNR, slightly higher than the A group but the difference was not statisticallysignificant (q=0.80, P>0.05).The evaluation segment sum in A, B, C three groups was statistically significant (χ~2=14.60, P <0.05), the left circumflex artery distal in three groups A, B, and C statisticalsignificance (χ2=8.14, P <0.05). A, B group in the evaluation segment sum of asignificant difference (χ~2=13.88, P <0.0167), distal left circumflex artery (χ2=6.46, P<0.0167), other segments of the difference was not statistically significance; B, C groupin evaluate segment sum (χ~2=3.03, P>0.0167) as well as branch difference was notstatistically significant. Group A, C in evaluate segment sum (χ~2=4.37, P>0.0167), aswell as branch difference was not statistically significant.Conclusion：(1) The target volume scanning method is a simple, effective, stable andfeasible way to individually scan to complete the whole heart scanning with average13min.(2) The target volume scanning method can clearly show proximal and middle of themain branch of the coronary artery and have the initially value of clinical application.(3) Coronary vessels image quality after injection of contrast agent is better than that of the coronary arteries without use of contrast agents; particularly by injection of contrastagent1min coronary artery image quality is better. |
PDF Full Text Request