ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
More Space, Less Noise-New-generation Low-Field Magnetic Resonance Imaging Systems Can Improve Patient Comfort: A Prospective 0.55T-1.5T-Scanner Comparison.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond the OR - challenges of MRI anesthesia in a complex oncologic patient: a case report.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Combining Fluorescence and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Drug Discovery-A Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Evaluating participant experiences and tolerability with MR Linac imaging.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- Global Cancer Imaging Access: Addressing Barriers and Harnessing Innovations.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2025Review
- Review
- Low-field and portable MRI technology: advancements and innovations.European radiology experimental · 2025Review
- Development of a Low-Profile, Piezoelectric Robot for MR-Guided Abdominal Needle Interventions.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Three-dimensional high-isotropic-resolution MR fingerprinting optimized for 0.55 T.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2025Article
- Clinical MR imaging of patients with spinal hardware at 0.55T: comparison of diagnostic assessment and metal artifact appearance with 1.5T.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025Article
- Measuring biventricular function and left atrial volume in a single five-dimensional whole-heart cardiovascular magnetic resonance scan at 0.55T.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2025Article
- High-resolution 3D whole-heart bright- and black-blood imaging with co-registered T2 mapping at 0.55 T.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Diagnosing acute myocarditis in the emergency department-advancing cardiac MRI with a focus on low-field MR applications.Frontiers in radiology · 2025Review
- Feasibility of fetal cardiac function and anatomy assessment by real-time spiral balanced steady-state free precession magnetic resonance imaging at 0.55T.Journal of cardiovascular magnetic resonance : official journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance · 2025Article
- Super-Field MRI Synthesis for Infant Brains Enhanced by Dual Channel Latent Diffusion.Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention : MICCAI ... International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention · 2024Article
- Modern acceleration in musculoskeletal MRI: applications, implications, and challenges.Skeletal radiology · 2024Review
- Cardiac Cine MRI Using a Commercially Available 0.55-T Scanner.Radiology. Cardiothoracic imaging · 2024Article
- Assessment of the Diagnostic Efficacy of Low-Field Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Advanced deep learning-based image reconstruction in lumbar spine MRI at 0.55 T - Effects on image quality and acquisition time in comparison to conventional deep learning-based reconstruction.European journal of radiology open · 2024Article
- Cardiac MRI at Low Field Strengths.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2024Review
- New clinical opportunities of low-field MRI: heart, lung, body, and musculoskeletal.Magma (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe objectives of this study were to assess patient comfort when imaged on a newly introduced 0.55T low-field magnetic resonance (MR) scanner system with a wider bore opening compared to a conventional 1.5T MR scanner system. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this prospective study, fifty patients (mean age: 66.2 ± 17.0 years, 22 females, 28 males) underwent subsequent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations with matched imaging protocols at 0.55T (MAGNETOM FreeMax, Siemens Healthineers; Erlangen, Germany) and 1.5T (MAGNETOM Avanto Fit, Siemens Healthineers; Erlangen, Germany) on the same day. MRI performed between 05/2021 and 07/2021 was included for analysis. The 0.55T MRI system had a bore opening of 80 cm, while the bore diameter of the 1.5T scanner system was 60 cm. Four patient groups were defined by imaged body regions: (1) cranial or cervical spine MRI using a head/neck coil (n = 27), (2) lumbar or thoracic spine MRI using only the in-table spine coils (n = 10), (3) hip MRI using a large flex coil (n = 8) and (4) upper- or lower-extremity MRI using small flex coils (n = 5). Following the MRI examinations, patients evaluated (1) sense of space, (2) noise level, (3) comfort, (4) coil comfort and (5) overall examination impression on a 5-point Likert-scale (range: 1= "much worse" to 5 = "much better") using a questionnaire. Maximum noise levels of all performed imaging studies were measured in decibels (dB) by a sound level meter placed in the bore center.
resultsSense of space was perceived to be "better" or "much better" by 84% of patients for imaging examinations performed on the 0.55T MRI scanner system (mean score: 4.34 ± 0.75). Additionally, 84% of patients rated noise levels as "better" or "much better" when imaged on the low-field scanner system (mean score: 3.90 ± 0.61). Overall sensation during the imaging examination at 0.55T was rated as "better" or "much better" by 78% of patients (mean score: 3.96 ± 0.70). Quantitative assessment showed significantly reduced maximum noise levels for all 0.55T MRI studies, regardless of body region compared to 1.5T, i.e., brain MRI (83.8 ± 3.6 dB vs. 89.3 ± 5.4 dB;
conclusionsPatients perceived 0.55T new-generation low-field MRI to be more comfortable than conventional 1.5T MRI, given its larger bore opening and reduced noise levels during image acquisition. Therefore, new concepts regarding bore design and noise level reduction of MR scanner systems may help to reduce patient anxiety and improve well-being when undergoing MR imaging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.