Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 9/2006

01-09-2006 | Neuro

Higher sensitivity in the detection of inflammatory brain lesions in patients with clinically isolated syndromes suggestive of multiple sclerosis using high field MRI: an intraindividual comparison of 1.5 T with 3.0 T

Authors: Mike P. Wattjes, Götz G. Lutterbey, Michael Harzheim, Jürgen Gieseke, Frank Träber, Luisa Klotz, Thomas Klockgether, Hans H. Schild

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 9/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the sensitivities in the detection of inflammatory lesions in patients with clinically isolated syndromes suggestive of multiple sclerosis at 3.0 T and 1.5 T. MR imaging of 40 patients at both field strengths was performed in separate sessions including contiguous axial slices of T2 turbo spin-echo (T2 TSE), fluid-attenuated-inversion-recovery (FLAIR) and pre- and postcontrast T1 spin-echo (T1 SE). Inflammatory lesions >3 mm in size were counted and categorized according to their anatomic location. Lesion conspicuity was assessed on a five-point scale. At 3.0 T, 13% more white matter lesions could be identified on the FLAIR sequence and on the T2 TSE sequence. Compared to 1.5 T 7.5% more contrast-enhancing lesions were detected at 3.0 T. The higher detection rate at 3.0 T was significant for the infratentorial (p=0.02) and juxtacortical (p<0.01) region on the FLAIR as well as for the infratentorial (p=0.03), juxtacortical (p=0.02) and periventricular (p=0.03) region on the T2 TSE sequence. The lesion conspicuity was significantly better at 3.0 T for FLAIR and T2 TSE sequences (p<0.01; p=0.01). In conclusion, high-field MRI at 3.0 T provides a significantly higher detection rate of inflammatory brain lesions especially in the infratentorial, juxtacortical and periventricular anatomic region.
Literature
1.
Paty DW, Oger JJF, Kastrukoff LF et al (1988) MRI in the diagnosis of MS: a prospective study with comparison of clinical evaluation, evoked potentials, oligoclonal banding, and CT. Neurology 38:180–185PubMed
2.
Omerod IEC, McDonald WI, duBoulay EPGH et al (1986) Disseminated lesions at presentation with optic neuritis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 49:124–127
3.
Omerod IEC, Miller DH, McDonald WI et al (1987) The role of NMR imaging in the assessment of multiple sclerosis and isolated neurological lesions. Brain 110:1579–1616CrossRef
4.
Barkhof F, Filippi M, Miller DH et al (1997) Comparison of MRI criteria at first presentation to predict conversion to clinically definite multiple sclerosis. Brain 120:2059–2069PubMedCrossRef
5.
Tintoré M, Rovira A, Martinez MJ et al (2000) Isolated demyelinating syndromes: comparison of different MR imaging criteria to predict conversion to clinically definite multiple sclerosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 21:702–706PubMed
6.
McDonald WI, Compston A, Edan G, Goodkin D, Hartung HP et al (2001) Recommended diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines from the International Panel on the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 50:121–127PubMedCrossRef
7.
Polman CH, Reingold SC, Edan G et al (2005) Diagnostic criteria for Multiple Sclerosis: Revisions to the “McDonald criteria”. Ann Neurol 58:840–846PubMedCrossRef
8.
Dalton CM, Brex PA, Miszkiel KA et al (2002) Application of the New McDonald Criteria to patients with Clinically Isolated Syndromes Suggestive of Multiple Sclerosis. Ann Neurol 52:47–53PubMedCrossRef
9.
Tintoré M, Rovira A, Río J et al (2003) New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis. Application in first demyelinating episode. Neurology 60:27–30PubMedCrossRef
10.
Yoursy TA, Filippi M, Becker C, Horsfield MA, Voltz R (1997) Comparison of MR pulse sequences in the detection of multiple sclerosis lesions. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 18:959–963
11.
Filippi M, Yousry T, Baratti C, Horsfield, MA, Mammi S, Becker C et al (1996) Quantitative assessment of MRI lesion load in multiple sclerosis: A comparison of conventional spin-echo with fast fluid-attenuated inversion recovery. Brain 119:1349–1355PubMedCrossRef
12.
Wattjes MP, Lutterbey GG, Harzheim M et al (2006) Imaging of inflammatory lesions at 3.0 tesla in patients with clinically isolated syndromes suggestive of multiple sclerosis: A comparison of fluid-attenuated inversion recovery with T2 turbo spin-echo. Eur Radiol Mar 21 [epub ahead of print]
13.
Filippi M, Horsfield MA, Campi A, Mammi S, Pereira C, Comi G (1995) Resolution-dependent estimates of lesion volumes in magnetic resonance imaging studies of the brain in multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 38:749–754PubMedCrossRef
14.
Filippi M, van Waesberghe JH, Horsfield MA et al (1997) Interscanner variation in brain MRI lesion load measurements in MS. Neurology 49:371–377PubMed
15.
Schima W, Wimberger D, Schneider B et al (1993) The importance of magnetic field strength in the MR diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: a comparison of 0.5 T and 1.5 T. Fortschr Röntgenstr 158:368–371CrossRef
16.
Lee DH, Vellet AD, Eliasziw M et al (1995) MR imaging field: prospective evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of MR for diagnosis of multiple sclerosis at 0.5 and 1.5 T. Radiology 194:257–262PubMed
17.
Keiper MD, Grossmann RI, Hirsch JA et al (1998) MR identification of white matter abnormalities in multiple sclerosis: a comparison between 1.5 T and 4 T. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 19:1489–1493PubMed
18.
Sicotte NL, Voskuhl RR, Bouvier S et al (2003) Comparison of multiple sclerosis lesions at 1.5 and 3.0 T. Invest Radiol 38:423–427PubMedCrossRef
19.
Kurtzke JF (1983) Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 33:1444–1452PubMed
20.
21.
Jacobs LD, Beck RW, Simon JH et al (2000) Intramuscular Interferon Beta-1a Therapy initiated during a first demyeliniating event in multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 343:898–904PubMedCrossRef
22.
Barkhof F, Filippi M, van Waesberghe JH et al (1999) Interobserver agreement for diagnostic MRI criteria in suspected multiple sclerosis. Neuroradiology 41:347–350PubMedCrossRef
23.
24.
Schick F (2005) Whole-body MRI at high field: technical limits and clinical potential. Eur Radiol 15:639–644CrossRef
25.
Krautmacher C, Willinek WA, Tschampa HJ et al (2005) Brain tumors: full- and half-dose contrast-enhanced MR imaging at 3.0 T compared with 1.5 T—initial experience. Radiology 237:1014–1019PubMedCrossRef
26.
Frohman EM, Goodin DS, Calabresi PA et al (2003) The utility of MRI in suspected MS. Report of the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology 61:602–611PubMed
27.
Miller DH, Filippi M, Fazekas F et al (2004) Role of magnetic resonance imaging within diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 56:273–278PubMedCrossRef
28.
Minneboo A, Barkhof F, Polman CH et al (2004) Infratentorial lesions predict long-term disability in patients with initial findings suggestive of multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 61:217–221PubMedCrossRef
29.
Wattjes MP, Harzheim M, Kuhl CK et al (2006) Does high-field MRI have an influence on the classification of patients with clinically isolated syndromes according to current diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging criteria for multiple sclerosis? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol (in press)
30.
Gizewski ER, Maderwald S, Wanke I et al (2005) Comparison of volume, four- and eight channel head coils using standard and parallel imaging. Eur Radiol 15:1555–1562PubMedCrossRef
31.
de Zwart JA, Ledden PJ, Kellman P et al (2002) Design of a SENSE-optimized high-sensitivity MRI receive coil for brain imaging. Magn Reson Med 47:1218–1227PubMedCrossRef
32.
Lutterbey G, Gieseke J, von Falkenhausen M et al (2005) Lung MRI at 3.0T: a comparison of helical CT and high-field MRI in the detection of diffuse lung disease. Eur Radiol 15:324–328PubMedCrossRef
33.
Gutberlet M, Schwinge K, Freyhardt P et al (2005) Influence of high magnetic field strengths and parallel acquisition strategies on image quality in cardiac 2 D CINE magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of 1.5 T vs. 3.0 T. Eur Radiol 15:1586–1597PubMedCrossRef
34.
Moarakkabati-Spitz N, Gieseke J, Kuhl C, Lutterbey G et al (2005) 3.0 T high-field magnetic resonance imaging of the female pelvis: preliminary experiences. Eur Radiol 15:639–644CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Higher sensitivity in the detection of inflammatory brain lesions in patients with clinically isolated syndromes suggestive of multiple sclerosis using high field MRI: an intraindividual comparison of 1.5 T with 3.0 T
Authors
Mike P. Wattjes
Götz G. Lutterbey
Michael Harzheim
Jürgen Gieseke
Frank Träber
Luisa Klotz
Thomas Klockgether
Hans H. Schild
Publication date
01-09-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 9/2006
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0195-4

Other articles of this Issue 9/2006

European Radiology 9/2006 Go to the issue

Calendar of Events

Calendar of Events

Neuro

Modern cross-sectional imaging in the diagnosis and follow-up of intracranial aneurysms

Neuro

MRI features of neurodegenerative Langerhans cell histiocytosis

Chest

Therapy monitoring using dynamic MRI: Analysis of lung motion and intrathoracic tumor mobility before and after radiotherapy

Gastrointestinal

Imaging of small intestinal Crohn’s disease: comparison between MR enteroclysis and conventional enteroclysis

Musculoskeletal

Image-guided percutaneous biopsy of intramedullary lytic bone lesions: utility of aspirated blood clots