Skip to main content
. 2018 Nov;39(11):1981–1988. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A5827

Table 2:

Comparison of the accuracy and precision index, coefficient of variation, and concordance correlation coefficient for all dosing schemes using intermediate and low flip angle protocols at 1.5T and 3T

Dosing Scheme (Preload + Bolus) Intermediate Flip Anglea
Low Flip Angleb
1.5T
3T
1.5T
3T
CCC CV% API CCC CV% API CCC CV% API CCC CV% API
(0 + 1) 0.30 21.7 0.08 0.55 12.4 0.43 0.93 8.7 0.84 0.92 8.2 0.83
(1/4 + 3/4) 0.51 13.3 0.38 0.74 8.8 0.65 0.94 8.9 0.85 0.94 7.8 0.86
(1/2 + 1/2) 0.61 12.7 0.48 0.76 9.2 0.67 0.91 10.6 0.80 0.90 8.7 0.82
(1/4 + 1) 0.86 7.9 0.78 0.93 6.8 0.86 0.96 7.7 0.89 0.97 7.0 0.90
(1/2 + 1) 0.90 7.7 0.82 0.96 6.8 0.89 0.96 7.5 0.89 0.97 6.8 0.91
(1 + 1) 0.94 7.4 0.86 0.97 6.6 0.91 0.96 7.4 0.89 0.98 6.8 0.91
a

FA = 60°, TE = 30 ms, TR = 1.5 sec.

b

FA = 30°, TE = 50 ms, TR = 1.5 sec, B0 = 1.5T; FA = 30°, TE = 30 ms, TR = 1.5 sec, B0 = 3T.