Low‐field musculoskeletal MRI

Ghazinoor, Shaya; Crues, John V.; Crowley, C.W.

doi:10.1002/jmri.20854

Cited by 56 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 30 publications

(31 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several review articles on low-field versus high-field MRI of the extremities agree that low-field strength MRI systems provide the ability to diagnose substantial pathologies within the ligaments and menisci of the knee [3,9,19]. This is in accordance with our findings.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 95%

“…But this was not associated with the used MRI field strength. A reason for the latter result may be that radiologists are undersensitised for recognising lateral meniscal lesions because they are less common than medial meniscal or ACL tears [19]. However, it should be stressed that specialised training is required for quality control and image interpretation in lowfield MRI.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Magnetic resonance tomography of the knee joint

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 95%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Magnetic resonance tomography of the knee joint

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other side there are two limitations that need to be acknowledged in the present study. Although the clinically accepted range of MRI covers from 0.2T to 3T (Ghazinoor et al 2007), the use of low-field MRI in this study made the detection of small cartilage abnormalities very challenging. The second point concerns to the sample size and the proximity of the two time endpoints for the euthanasia, which gave similar results, making possible to combine data for each treatment from both the 12-and 20-week groups for the statistical analysis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An arthroscopic approach for the treatment of osteochondral focal defects with cell-free and cell-loaded PLGA scaffolds in sheep

Fonseca¹,

Caminal

Peris

et al. 2013

Cytotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Osteochondral injuries are common in humans and are relatively difficult to manage with current treatment options. The combination of novel biomaterials and expanded progenitor or stem cells provides a source of therapeutic and immunologically compatible medicines that can be used in regenerative medicine. However, such new medicinal products need to be tested in translational animal models using the intended route of administration in humans and the intended delivery device. In this study, we evaluated the feasibility of an arthroscopic approach for the implantation of biocompatible copolymeric poly-D,Llactide-co-glycolide (PLGA) scaffolds in an ovine preclinical model of knee osteochondral defects.Moreover this procedure was further tested using ex vivo expanded autologous chondrocytes derived from cartilaginous tissue, which were loaded in PLGA scaffolds and their potential to generate hyaline cartilage was evaluated. All scaffolds were successfully implanted arthroscopically and the clinical evolution of the animals was followed by non invasive MRI techniques, similar to the standard in human clinical practice. No clinical complications occurred after the transplantation procedures in any of the animals. Interestingly, the macroscopic evaluation demonstrated significant improvement after treatment with scaffolds loaded with cells compared to untreated controls.C. Fonseca, M. Caminal and D. Peris contributed equally to this work.Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article

show abstract

“…The caveat is the expertise of the user and image reader. While there is no question that the higher field MRI units (greater than 1.0 T) provide better quality images, Ghazinoor et al 11 have concluded that low-field scanners have demonstrated high diagnostic value in musculoskeletal pathology, although image interpretation is impacted by the training and experience of the reader and they may not be optimal for diagnosis of some structures, such as the meniscus of the knee.…”

Section: Field Strengthmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Pearls and Pitfalls of Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Upper Extremity

Strudwick¹,

Anderson²,

Dimmick³

et al. 2011

J Orthop Sports Phys Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), like computed tomography, can produce images in any anatomical plane, visualize and analyze a variety of tissue characteristics, as well as quantify blood flow and metabolic functions. It does not use ionizing radiation but, rather, utilizes an apparently safe interaction between static magnetic fields, radio waves, and atomic nuclei. Randomly oriented tissue nuclei are aligned by a powerful, uniform magnetic field. Properly tuned radiofrequency (RF) pulses then disrupt this magnetization and, as the nuclei recover their alignment by relaxation processes, they produce radio signals that are proportional to the magnitude of the initial alignment. is capable of producing images in any anatomical plane, visualizing and analyzing a variety of tissue characteristics, as well as quantifying blood flow and metabolic functions. Although MRI details of compact bone and calcium are poor when compared to those taken with plain radiography or computed tomography, its high soft tissue contrast discrimination and multiplanar imaging capabilities are significant advantages. Musculoskeletal anatomy and neurovascular bundles are well delineated. The advent of MRI has revolutionized the clinician's ability to confirm a proper diagnosis for musculoskeletal problems, which has led to more directed, specific rehabilitative protocols. However, the value of MRI to rehabilitative professionals has been even greater in its ability to identify serious, more uncommon pathologies, such as in those with underlying infection, fracture, or tumor, that require immediate care and are considered to be beyond their scope of practice. Furthermore, MRI, with its precise delineation of fat, muscle, and bone, is an ideal candidate for imaging of muscle disease or injury and has emerged as the method of choice for the detection of early cartilage wear in young patients, such as osteoarthritis. Finally, this imaging modality can avoid radiation exposure in a predominantly younger patient cohort commonly affected by musculoskeletal diseases. The aim of this paper is to consider how physical therapists may take advantage of the diagnostic value of MRI of the upper limb, while avoiding the pitfalls of misinterpretation of images as a result of technical issues, pathological changes, or normal variants. Ther 2011;41(11):861-872. doi:10.2519/jospt.2011 J Orthop Sports Phys T T KEY WORDS: MRI, musculoskeletal, radiology Image ContrastTissue contrast (differences in signal, T1 and T2) develops as a result of the rates at which nuclei realign with the main magnetic field. T1 is the time constant that describes how magnetization returns to its original state of equilibrium after the RF perturbation (T1 relaxation). It is an exponential process that depends on the interaction of the nucleus with its surroundings. T2 is the time constant that describes the process whereby the nuclear spins go out of phase with each other, losing their initial synchronization (T2 relaxation). 2 These processes occur together and cannot be separ...

show abstract

Low‐field musculoskeletal MRI

Cited by 56 publications

References 30 publications

Magnetic resonance tomography of the knee joint

Magnetic resonance tomography of the knee joint

An arthroscopic approach for the treatment of osteochondral focal defects with cell-free and cell-loaded PLGA scaffolds in sheep

The Pearls and Pitfalls of Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Upper Extremity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About