Comparison of Hippocampal Volumetry at 1.5 Tesla and at 3 Tesla
- 22 August 2001
- Vol. 42 (8), 1021-1024
- https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1528-1157.2001.0420081021.x
Abstract
Summary: Purpose: Hippocampal volumetry using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a common clinical study in epilepsy patients. Most clinical MR scans operate at 1.5 tesla (T); however, there is increasing use of scanners of a higher field strength. We analyzed whether control data of hippocampal volumes can be used across different field‐strength scanners. Methods: We studied eight adult healthy controls twice at both 1.5 and 3 T. Bilateral hippocampal volumes were measured by manual outlining. Measurement error was analyzed based on the variability between two measurements at the same field strength, and intrascanner variability was analyzed based on the difference between measurements obtained at 1.5 and at 3 T. Results: The measurement error was 4.0% (±3.1) at 1.5 T, and 3.4% (±2.5) at 3 T. The intrascanner variability between measurements at 1.5 and at 3 T was 6% (±3.9). The intrascanner variability was not different from the measurement error. Conclusions: Control hippocampal volume measurements obtained at 1.5 and at 3 T were not different.Keywords
This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- Men may be more vulnerable to seizure-associated brain damageNeurology, 2000
- Hippocampal malformation as a cause of familial febrile convulsions and subsequent hippocampal sclerosisNeurology, 1998
- Image Contrast and Hippocampal Volumetric MeasurementsMagnetic Resonance Imaging, 1998
- The spectrum of hippocampal sclerosis: A quantitative magnetic resonance imaging studyAnnals of Neurology, 1997
- Volumes of hippocampus, amygdala and frontal lobe in Alzheimer patients with different apolipoprotein E genotypesNeuroscience, 1995
- Reliability of in vivo volume measures of hippocampus and other brain structures using MRIMagnetic Resonance Imaging, 1993
- Hippocampal sclerosis in temporal lobe epilepsy demonstrated by magnetic resonance imagingAnnals of Neurology, 1991
- STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENTThe Lancet, 1986