. AlecciMCollinsCMSmithMBJezzardP: Radio frequency magnetic field mapping of a 3 Tesla birdcage coil: experimental and theoretical dependence on sample properties. Magn Reson Med. 46:379–385, 2001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.1201
2.
. BarrCBauerJSMalfairD: MR imaging of the ankle at 3 Tesla and 1.5 Tesla: protocol optimization and application to cartilage, ligament and tendon pathology in cadaver specimens. Eur Radiol. 17:1518–1528, 2007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0446-4
3.
. BauerJSBanerjeeSHenningTD: Fast high-spatial-resolution MRI of the ankle with parallel imaging using GRAPPA at 3 T. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 189:240–245, 2007. 189/1/240 http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.2066
4.
. BaumertBWortlerKSteffingerD: Assessment of the internal craniocervical ligaments with a new magnetic resonance imaging sequence: three-dimensional turbo spin echo with variable flip-angle distribution (SPACE). Magn Reson Imaging. 27:954–960, 2009. S0730-725X(09)00034-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2009.01.012
. ChangKJKamelIRMacuraKJBluemkeDA: 3.0-T MR imaging of the abdomen: comparison with 1.5 T. Radiographics. 28:1983–1998, 2008. 28/7/1983 http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/rg.287075154
7.
. ChhabraAAndreisekGSoldatosT: MR Neurography: Past, present and future. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 197(3): 583–91, 2011.
8.
. ChhabraASoldatosTChalianM: 3-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of posterior tibial tendon dysfunction with relevance to clinical staging. J Foot Ankle Surg. 50(3): 320–8, 2011.
9.
. ChhabraASubhawongTKCarrinoJA: MR imaging of deltoid ligament pathologic findings and associated impingement syndromes. Radiographics. 30:751–761, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/rg.303095756
10.
. ChhabraASubhawongTKWilliamsEBH: High Resolution MR Neurography evaluation prior to repeat tarsal tunnel surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 50(3): 320–8, 2011.
11.
. ChhabraAWilliamsEHWangKCDellonALCarrinoJA: MR neurography of neuromas related to nerve injury and entrapment with surgical correlation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 31:1363–1368, 2010. ajnr. A2002 http://dx.doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A2002
12.
. DardzinskiBJMosherTJLiSVan SlykeMASmithMB: Spatial variation of T2 in human articular cartilage. Radiology. 205:546–550, 1997.
13.
. FukatsuH: 3T MR for clinical use: update. Magn Reson Med Sci. 2:37–45, 2003.
14.
. GieselFLRungeVKirchinM: Three-dimensional multiphase time-resolved low-dose contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography using TWIST on a 32-channel coil at 3 T: a quantitative and qualitative comparison of a conventional gadolinium chelate with a high-relaxivity agent. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 34:678–683, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0b013e3181e359c200004728–201009000–00007
15.
. GyftopoulosSBencardinoJT: Normal variants and pitfalls in MR imaging of the ankle and foot. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 18:691–705, 2010. S1064-9689(10)00046-2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2010.07.007
. HillierJCPeaceKHulmeAHealyJC: Pictorial review: MRI features of foot and ankle injuries in ballet dancers. Br J Radiol. 77:532–537, 2004.
18.
. KatoYHiganoSTamuraH: Usefulness of contrast-enhanced T1-weighted sampling perfection with application-optimized contrasts by using different flip angle evolutions in detection of small brain metastasis at 3T MR imaging: comparison with magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition of gradient echo imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 30:923–929, 2009. ajnr. A1506 http://dx.doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A1506
19.
. KijowskiRDe SmetAMukharjeeR: Magnetic resonance imaging findings in patients with peroneal tendinopathy and peroneal tenosynovitis. Skeletal Radiol, 2011. 36:105–114, 2007. 10.1007/s00256-006-0172-7
. KrautmacherCWillinekWATschampaHJ: Brain tumors: full- and half-dose contrast-enhanced MR imaging at 3.0 T compared with 1.5 T–Initial Experience. Radiology. 237:1014–1019, 2005. 2373041672 http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2373041672
22.
. LangnerIFrankMKuehnJP: Acute inversion injury of the ankle without radiological abnormalities: assessment with high-field MR imaging and correlation of findings with clinical outcome. Skeletal Radiol, 2001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00256-010-1017-y
23.
. MarlovitsSSingerPZellerP: Magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) for the evaluation of autologous chondrocyte transplantation: determination of interobserver variability and correlation to clinical outcome after 2 years. Eur J Radiol. 57:16–23, 2006. S0720-048X(05)00288-3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.08.007
24.
. MerkleEMDaleBM: Abdominal MRI at 3.0 T: the basics revisited. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 186:1524–1532, 2006. 186/6/1524 http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.05.0932
25.
. NoyesFRStablerCL: A system for grading articular cartilage lesions at arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med. 17:505–513, 1989.
26.
. PastoreDDirimBWangwinyuviratM: Complex distal insertions of the tibialis posterior tendon: detailed anatomic and MR imaging investigation in cadavers. Skeletal Radiol. 37:849–855, 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00256-008-0499-3
27.
. PerrichKDGoodwinDWHechtPJCheungY: Ankle ligaments on MRI: appearance of normal and injured ligaments. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 193:687–695, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.08.2286
28.
. QuirbachSTrattnigSMarlovitsS: Initial results of in vivo high-resolution morphological and biochemical cartilage imaging of patients after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT) of the ankle. Skeletal Radiol. 38:751–760, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00256-009-0682-1
29.
. RademakerJRosenbergZSDelfautEMCheungYYSchweitzerME: Tear of the peroneus longus tendon: MR imaging features in nine patients. Radiology. 214:700–704, 2000.
30.
. RamnathRR: 3T MR imaging of the musculoskeletal system (Part II): clinical applications. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 14:41–62, 2006. S1064-9689(06)00004-3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2006.01.003
31.
. ReachJSJr.AmramiKKFelmleeJP: The compartments of the foot: a 3-tesla magnetic resonance imaging study with clinical correlates for needle pressure testing. Foot Ankle Int. 28:584–594, 2007. 957932 http://dx.doi.org/10.3113/FAI.2007.0584
32.
. SoherBJDaleBMMerkleEM: A review of MR physics: 3T versus 1.5T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 15:277–290, 2007. v. S1064-9689(07)00077-3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2007.06.002
33.
. StollerDW: The ankle and foot. Magnetic resonance imaging in orhopaedics and sports medicine. Baltimore, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2:733–1050, 2004.
34.
. TaylorCCarballido-GamioJMajumdarSLiX: Comparison of quantitative imaging of cartilage for osteoarthritis: T2, T1rho, dGEMRIC and contrast-enhanced computed tomography. Magn Reson Imaging. 27:779–784, 2009. S0730-725X(09)00008-3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2009.01.016