Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Nov 1.
Published in final edited form as: Magn Reson Med. 2014 Sep 12;72(5):1208–1217. doi: 10.1002/mrm.25450

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Comparing the three coronary MRA protocols in terms of scan time, aSNR, aCNR and coronary sharpness. (a) while the proposed method offered a fixed 10-min scan time, the scan time of ECG+3DPR depended on the subject’s heart rate, and the scan time of Cartesian depended on the subject’s heart rate as well as breathing pattern; (b) the three techniques provided similar aSNR; (c) the aCNR of the proposed method, which depended on the steady-state T1 weighting, was lower than those of the other two IR-prepared techniques; (d) the coronary sharpness was comparable for the three techniques.