The following table or figure may be downloaded to PowerPoint for personal use in teaching and presentations. This feature is available to all subscribers to the journal.

You MUST read and follow the guidelines at Request to Reproduce AJR Content if you are distributing or using AJR content beyond academic use (limited distribution, non-revenue producing, or educational purposes).

(Downloading may take up to 30 seconds.
If the slide opens in your browser, select File -> Save As to save it.)
Click on image to view larger version.

Fig. 1C —Dual-echo gradient-recalled echo (TR, 150 milliseconds; flip angle, 75°; slice thickness, 7.5 mm; breath-hold, 19 seconds). Time-efficient implementation first-echo (TE = 1.3 milliseconds; fat and water opposed-phase; 20 slices) (C) and second-echo (TE = 2.3 milliseconds; fat and water in-phase; 20 slices) (D) images. Note extra signal loss (B, arrow) in conventional opposed-phase TE (5.8 milliseconds) compared with our time-efficient opposed-phase TE (1.3 milliseconds) (C). Although slices do not match exactly because they are taken from two separate breath-holds, adjacent opposed-phase slices directly superior and inferior (not shown) also showed greater signal loss in stomach area (arrow, B) for conventional implementation compared with time-efficient acquisition. Because degree of gastric distention due to air and fluid content was visually identical between the two acquisitions (taken about 1 minute apart), increased signal loss in conventional implementation is most likely due to greater susceptibility-induced dephasing at longer TE.