Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jul 29.
Published in final edited form as: Magn Reson Med. 2014 Jan 29;73(1):312–317. doi: 10.1002/mrm.25121

Table 1.

Image Quality Comparison between ADIOS and NAV at Proximal–Middle Portion of Renal Arteries (Main Renal Arteries and Extraparenchyma Branches)

rSNR rCNR Reviewer scorea
Vessel sharpness (mm−1)
L R
ADIOS (A) 44.9±6.9 31.0±6.0 4.44±0.50 4.63±0.48 0.88±0.13
NAV (A) 44.5±4.5 31.2±8.7 4.44±0.50 4.38±0.70 0.87±0.11
Paired diff. 0.4±4.2 0.1±3.6 0 0.25±0.66 0.01±0.06
P value 0.78 0.94 1 0.35 0.70
ADIOS (B) 38.3±2.9 28.1±3.7 4.33±0.75 4.50±0.76 0.90±0.08
NAV (B) 34.7±7.4 24.5±7.1 4.50±0.76 4.50±0.76 0.85±0.07
Paired diff. 3.5±4.3 3.6±4.6 −0.17±0.37 0 0.05±0.03
P value 0.13 0.14 0.36 1 0.01
ADIOS (T) 42.3±6.5 29.9±5.4 4.40±0.61 4.57±0.62 0.89±0.11
NAV (T) 40.6±9.2 28.3±6.9 4.46±0.62 4.43±0.73 0.87±0.09
Paired diff. 1.7±4.5 1.5±4.4 −0.07±0.25 0.14±0.52 0.02±0.05
P value 0.19 0.22 0.33 0.34 0.14
a

Based on five-point scale (from 1=nondiagnostic to 5=excellent).

rSNR=relative signal-to-noise ratio; rCNR=relative contrast-to-noise ratio; ADIOS=adaptive online self-gating; NAV=diaphragm navigator; A=Group A; B=Group B; T=Total (Group T).