The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

52 protocols using 1.5t scanner

1

Multimodal MRI Imaging Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
MRI was changed from Siemens 1.5-T scanner to Philips 3.0-T scanner at the examination facility in January 2016 during the study period. The Siemens 1.5-T scanner was used for 1300 participants and the Philips 3.0-T scanner was used for 499 participants. Images were obtained with conventional T2-weighted, T1-weighted, fluid-attenuated inversion recovery, and T2* images. Additionally, three-dimensional T1-weighted images were acquired using magnetization prepared rapid acquisition with gradient echo (MPRAGE) and T1 turbo field echo (T1TFE) sequences. The acquisition parameters are shown in the Supplementary Material.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

CMR Imaging on 1.5 T Philips Scanner

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
CMR studies were performed on a 1.5 T Philips scanner (Philips Healthcare, Best, The Netherlands) using a 32-channel torso coil. All participants provided written informed consent, and the study was approved by the local ethics committee (IRB STU 032016–009).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Functional Neuroimaging of Cognitive Tasks

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
In this study, a 1.5 T Philips scanner was used, equipped with whole-brain single-shot 3D blood oxygen level dependent echoplanar imaging (EPI) hardware. Head pads and a firm chin strap immobilized head flexion-extension. Thirty-four axial slices of 4 mm thickness, parallel to the intercommisural plane (from z = −50 mm to z = + 80 mm), were collected using an EPI gradient echo sequence: echo time = 50 ms; repetition time (TR) = 3000 ms; flip angle = 90°; field of view = 230 mm; voxel size = 3.59 × 3.59 × 4 mm3; matrix = 64 × 64. T1-weighted images were also acquired. Data acquisition was organized in an epoch-related design. Acquisition time was divided into VP periods followed by VS periods. Each period consisted of seven EPI acquisitions of 3000 ms (TR) each, 21 s in total. For both VP and VS, the image’s projection lasted for a whole EPI acquisition (3000 ms), resulting in seven images per epoch. The two exercises were performed for 8 periods, for a total of 16 periods, divided into 112 volumes. Tasks lasted 336 s, corresponding to 5 min and 36 s. Potential brain abnormalities were previously excluded by examining conventional FLAIR, T2-weighted, and T1-weighted images.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Lumbar spine MRI protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All MRI scans were performed at the Department of Radiology at International St. Mary’s Hospital. LS-MRI examinations were performed using a 3T Avanto (Siemens Medical Systems, Erlangen, Germany) or with 1.5 T scanners (Philips Medical Systems, Best, Netherlands). For LS-MRI examinations, axial turbo spin echo T2-weighted images were obtained with a slice thickness < 4.0 mm, 0.9 mm intersection gap, 3937-ms/120-ms repetition time/echo time, 150 × 150 field of view, 256 × 250 matrix. All LS-MRI data were transferred from the MRI unit to an INFINITT Picture Archiving System (INFINITT Medical Systems, Seoul, Korea).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Structural MRI Brain Volume Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Structural T1‐weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans were acquired on either GE, Siemens, or Philips 1.5T scanners at various ADNI sites using standardized MRI acquisition protocols described in detail elsewhere.28Anatomical scans (baseline and follow‐up measures) were processed using the FreeSurfer software (version 4.3)29 to obtain regional brain volume measures. This atlas‐based approach was previously described and validated.30 Right and left hemisphere hippocampal volumes were extracted from the ADNI database and the sum included into our analysis. To investigate whether effects were specific to the hippocampus, or could also be found in other brain regions,13 we assessed the following cortical volumes in follow‐up analyses: entorhinal, fusiform, lateral, and medial orbitofrontal, and middle temporal regions (bilateral), which were downloaded and calculated as above. Brain region volumes were adjusted for baseline total intracranial volume (ICV) by calculating the ratio between regional brain volume and ICV, multiplied by the overall sample mean of ICV.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Cardiac MRI Acquisition Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance data were acquired using one of two 1.5 T scanners (Philips Achieva, Best, the Netherlands, between 2003 and 2015, and Siemens MAGNETOM Aera, Erlangen, Germany, between 2015 and 2017). Standard ECG‐gated short‐axis and long‐axis cine balanced steady‐state free precession images covering the heart were acquired at end‐expiratory breath‐hold using a cardiac phased‐array coil either in combination with a second cardiac phased‐array coil (Philips) or in combination with a spine phased‐array coil (Siemens). Typical image parameters were 1.4 × 1.4 × 8 mm3, flip angle 60°, TR/TE 3/1.4 ms, with an acquired temporal resolution of 50 ms reconstructed to 30 (Philips) or 25 (Siemens) time frames per cardiac cycle. A standard 2D gradient recalled echo with retrospective ECG‐gating was used to acquire phase‐contrast quantitative flow data in the pulmonary artery during free breathing. Typical parameters were 1.3 × 1.3 × 8 mm3, TR/TE 20/3 ms, flip angle 10°/20°. Acquisition time was approximately 2 min averaged to 30 or 35 phases per cardiac cycle (<30 ms per phase). If arrhythmia was present, real‐time phase‐contrast flow sequences over 5 s were acquired. Typical parameters were 3 × 3 × 9 mm3, TR/TE 5/5 ms, flip angle 15°. Velocity encoding was set to 150–250 cm/s on an individual basis.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Cardiac MRI Assessment of LV Function

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All CMR imaging was performed on a 1.5 T scanner (Philips Achieva, Best, The Netherlands) using a 32-channel coil. LV function was assessed by cine imaging using a steady-state free precession sequence (SSFP) in breath hold both in short-axis and long-axis projections (2-, 3- and 4-chamber views).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Cardiac MRI Protocol for Framingham Heart Study

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The Framingham Heart Study cardiac MRI protocol has been reported elsewhere.2 (link),10 (link),11 (link) Briefly, supine imaging was performed on a Philips 1.5T scanner with a 5-element commercial cardiac array coil. End-expiratory breath-hold, ECG-gated cine steady state free precession images were acquired in 2-chamber, 4-chamber, and contiguous short axis orientations (temporal resolution, 39ms; repetition time, R-R interval; echo time, 9ms; flip angle, 30°; field of view, 400mm; matrix size, 208x256; slice thickness, 10mm; gap, 0mm). Analyses were performed by an experienced reviewer blinded to clinical information using a clinical workstation (EasyVision 5.1, Philips Medical Systems). End-diastolic volume (EDV) was determined as the minimal cross-sectional area of a midventricular slice. EDV and end-systolic volume (ESV) were computed by summation-of-disks method with cardiac output (L/min) calculated as (EDV-ESV) x heart rate. Cardiac output was divided by body surface area to calculate cardiac index (L/min/m2). Inter-rater reliability correlation coefficient for EDV=0.95 and for ESV=0.92. Intra-observer coefficient of variation for EDV=2.6% and for ESV=3.5%.12 (link) Inter-observer coefficient of variation for EDV=3.5% and ESV=4.8%.12 (link)
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Contrast-Enhanced Cardiac MRI Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
CMR imaging was performed using a 1.5T scanner (Philips Achieva, Best, The Netherlands) with a 32-element cardiac phased-array receiver coil. Scar imaging was performed using a dark-blood LGE sequence with an optimized joint inversion preparation and T2 magnetization preparation to simultaneously suppress myocardial and blood signal and enhance blood-scar contrast46 (link),47 . Imaging was performed 15–25 minutes after injection of 0.15–0.2 mmol/kg gadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance; Bracco Imaging, Milan, Italy). A respiratory navigator with an adaptive acquisition window48 (link) was used for prospective motion correction. Imaging was performed in short-axis with the following parameters: gradient echo imaging sequence; spatial resolution = 1.3 × 1.3 × 1.3 mm3; field-of-view = 320 × 335 × 90 mm3; TR/TE/flip angle = 2.6/1.3msec/55°; sensitivity encoding rate = 2; centric phase-encoding order.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

MRI-based Assessment of Stroke Lesion Volume

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
MRI was conducted using a 1.5-T scanner (Achieva, Philips Medical Systems, Best, The Netherlands) for all patients. T2-weighted images (turbo spin-echo, reconstructed voxel size = 0.45 × 0.45 × 5.00 mm3) and three-dimensional T1-weighted images (turbo field-echo, reconstructed voxel size = 0.94 × 0.94 × 1.00 mm3) were obtained to cover the whole brain. To compute stroke LV, lesions of each patient were manually drawn on the T2-weighted images, and they were spatially normalized to the Montreal Neurological Institute stereotaxic space, using the Clinical Toolbox37 (link) in SPM838 (Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, London, UK). Details of the MRI acquisition conditions are fully described in our previous report10 (link).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!