Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Aim: To evaluate the image quality of MR angiography (MRA) with a peripheral vascular coil.
Materials And Methods: A peripheral vascular coil, a technical coil used in MRA of the pelvis and lower extremities, has 12 individual coil elements arranged in six pairs. We evaluated the performance of a peripheral vascular coil for image quality, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and visual evaluation by comparing it to a body coil using a phantom.
Results: SNR with the peripheral vascular coil was 1.5-2.2 times higher than that with the body coil in vertical distance, and 1.6-1.8 times higher in horizontal distance. CNR with the peripheral vascular coil was 2.1-3.8 times higher than that with the body coil. Visual evaluation with the peripheral vascular coil was 1.1-1.2 times higher than with the body coil in spin echo sequences, and 1.2-1.9 times higher in 3D fast spoiled GRASS (3D-FSPGR) sequences.
Conclusion: The peripheral vascular coil for peripheral MRA is robust and accurate in evaluating peripheral vascular diseases.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!