Contrast-enhanced MR angiography of the carotid artery using 3D time-resolved imaging of contrast kinetics: comparison with real-time fluoroscopic triggered 3D-elliptical centric view ordering.

PURPOSE To evaluate contrast-enhanced MR angiography using the 3D time-resolved imaging of contrast kinetics technique (3D-TRICKS) by direct comparison with the fluoroscopic triggered 3D-elliptical centric view ordering (3D-ELLIP) technique. METHODS 3D-TRICKS and 3D-ELLIP were directly compared on a 1.5-Tesla MR unit using the same spatial resolution and matrix. In 3D-TRICKS, the central part of the k-space is updated more frequently than the peripheral part of the k-space, which is divided in the slice-encoding direction. The carotid arteries were imaged using 3D-TRICKS and 3D-ELLIP sequentially in 14 patients. Temporal resolution was 12 sec for 3D-ELLIP and 6 sec for 3D-TRICKS. The signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) of the common carotid artery was measured, and the quality of MIP images was then scored in terms of venous overlap and blurring of vessel contours. RESULTS No significant difference in mean S/N was seen between the two methods. Significant venous overlap was not seen in any of the patients examined. Moderate blurring of vessel contours was noted on 3D-TRICKS in five patients and on 3D-ELLIP in four patients. Blurring in the slice-encoding direction was slightly more pronounced in 3D-TRICKS. However, qualitative analysis scores showed no significant differences. CONCLUSION When the spatial resolution of the two methods was identical, the performance of 3D-TRICKS was found to be comparable in static visualization of the carotid arteries with 3D-ELLIP, although blurring in the slice-encoding direction was slightly more pronounced in 3D-TRICKS. 3D-TRICKS is a more robust technique than 3D-ELLIP, because 3D-ELLIP requires operator-dependent fluoroscopic triggering. Furthermore, 3D-TRICKS can achieve higher temporal resolution. For the spatial resolution employed in this study, 3D-TRICKS may be the method of choice.