MRT des Kniegelenks: Erste Ergebnisse eines Vergleichs von 0,2-T-Spezialsystem mit 1,5-T-Hochfeldmagnet

Abstract

The low-field MR-system offers low-cost MR examinations of peripheral joints with good image quality and reliable diagnostic information.

MRI preferable to diagnostic arthroscopy in knee joint injuries a double-blind comparison of 47 patients

“…1993, Kinnunen et al 1994, Kersting-Sommerhoff et al 1995. 4 of the studies used magnets with a field strength of less than 0.3 T, ranging from 0.064 T (D'Erme et al 1992) to 0.2 T (Kersting-Sommerhoff et al 1995). In general, the results of these 4 studies are not different from results of the double-blind studies using high-and intermediate field magnets (Barronian et al 1989, Glashow et al 1989, Raunest et al 199 I , Spiers et al 1993).…”

“…1993, Kinnunen et al 1994, Kersting-Sommerhoff et al 1995. 4 of the studies used magnets with a field strength of less than 0.3 T, ranging from 0.064 T (D'Erme et al 1992) to 0.2 T (Kersting-Sommerhoff et al 1995).…”

“…In general, the results of these 4 studies are not different from results of the double-blind studies using high-and intermediate field magnets (Barronian et al 1989, Glashow et al 1989, Raunest et al 199 I , Spiers et al 1993). In one of the studies (Kersting-Sommerhoff et al 1995), all 20 patients underwent two MRI examinations, one with a 0.2 T dedicated joint MRI-system and one with a 1.5 T wholebody scanner. No major differences in diagnostic accuracy were detected between the two MRI examinations.…”

“…MRI is now well established as the best imaging for noninvasive evaluation of the knee (Glashow et al 1989, Fischer et al 1991, Heron and Calvert 1992, Heron 1993, but the question of diagnostic and/or economic superiority has been much disputed as regards the field strength of the magnet (Parizel et al 1995, Ziedses des Plantes andKoster 1995). Highfield MRI systems theoretically provide a better signal-to-noise ratio and permit shorter acquisition times than low-field MRI systems do but the latter seem to be fully or partially able to overcome these limitations since their technology improved (Kersting-Sommerhoff et al 1995). Therefore we undertook a prospective study comparing the findings of low-field MRI of the knee with those of subsequent arthroscopy in patients having knee joint injuries, in order to assess how far MRI can reduce the need for diagnostic arthroscopy.…”

Diagnosis of acute fractures of the extremities: comparison of low-field MRI and conventional radiography

“…Dedicated low-field MRI systems have been developed as an alternative to high-field systems for cost-saving reasons [1,2]. During the past few years, low-field MRI has proved to be a valuable method for the examination of traumatic injuries of the distal extremities [3,4,5,6,7]. In our study we used dedicated low-field MRI as an initial imaging tool in acute trauma patients.…”