MedicinePathologyRadiologyDiagnostic ImagingDiagnostic RadiologyImage InterpretationHead ImagingMagnetic Resonance Contrast MechanismsMagnetic Resonance ImagingMagnetic Resonance Imaging PhysicsMedical ImagingNeck ImagingArtifacts In Magnetic Resonance ImagingDistortionsGradient Echo SequencesMagnetic Resonance Imaging InterpretationMagnetic Susceptibility AnalysisMagnetic Susceptibility ContrastsStatic Magnetic FieldSusceptibility Effects
PURPOSE: To describe fat-suppression failure artifacts and to caution against their misinterpretation. METHOD: Magnetic-susceptibility artifacts were studied in a phantom model and the results were compared to MR images obtained in clinical cases. FINDINGS: Artifacts manifested themselves as regions of focal fat-suppression failure and appeared as bright signals without geometric distortions at magnetic-susceptibility interfaces along the static field (z) direction. The location and extent of these artifacts were independent of either frequency or phase-encoding direction and are different from those observed in gradient-echo images. CONCLUSIONS: In representative clinical MR exams, these artifacts were identified in the high nasopharynx and low orbit and should not be misinterpreted as pathology.
16
Simple proton spectroscopic imaging.
W. Thomas Dixon · Radiology · 1984 · 2.3K citations
MR imaging: clinical use of the inversion recovery sequence.
G. M. Bydder, I. R. Young · PubMed · 1985 · 479 citations
Susceptibility artefacts in NMR imaging
K.‐M. Lüdeke, P. Röschmann, R. Tischler · Magnetic Resonance Imaging · 1985 · 447 citations
Short-Ti inversion-recovery pulse sequence: analysis and initial experience in cancer imaging.
Andrew J. Dwyer, J A Frank, Victor J. Sank et al. · Radiology · 1988 · 148 citations