Skip to main content
Top

03-02-2025 | Osteomyelitis | Original Article

Clinical MR imaging of patients with spinal hardware at 0.55T: comparison of diagnostic assessment and metal artifact appearance with 1.5T

Authors: Lauren J. Kelsey, Nicole Seiberlich, Jayapalli Bapuraj, Francisco Rivas, Maria Masotti, Vikas Gulani, Shruti Mishra

Published in: European Spine Journal

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study is to assess inter-reader agreement of imaging findings and compare readers’ assessment of image quality (IQ) and appearance of metal artifact (MA) in patients with spinal implants between 0.55T and 1.5T MRI.

Methods

Patients imaged on Siemens Healthineers Magnetom Free.Max 0.55T (n = 42; avg. age 55 yrs.) with spinal hardware between 12/2021 and 3/2024 were included. Of these, 18 patients had a paired exam at 1.5T. All exams were reviewed independently by three neuroradiologists (R1-3). Readers selected imaging findings from a pick-list and rated sequences using a 4-point Likert scale for IQ and MA.

Results

At both 0.55T and 1.5T, raw agreement for the following findings ranged between 81 and 95%: cord signal abnormality, osteomyelitis/discitis, osseous metastatic disease, and compression fracture. Agreement on post-operative fluid collection and spinal canal stenosis was 64.3% and 66.7% at 0.55T, and 77.7% and 50.0% at 1.5T. Agreement on neural foraminal stenosis was low in both cohorts, 47.6% and 33.3% at 0.55T and 1.5T. No sequence at 0.55T was rated inferior to 1.5T in IQ or MA. Sequences rated higher at 0.55T compared to 1.5T were as follows for IQ: sagittal T1w TSE (R1) and as follows for MA: axial T1w TSE (R1, R2), sagittal T1w TSE (R1), axial T2w TSE (R1), sagittal T1w TSE Dixon post-contrast (R2), sagittal T2w STIR (R2: p = 0.01).

Conclusion

Imaging patients with spinal hardware at 0.55T results in comparable inter-reader agreement for clinically-relevant imaging findings and equivalent or improved image quality compared to 1.5T.
Literature
10.
go back to reference Seifert AC, Breit HC, Schlicht F, Donners R, Harder D, Vosshenrich J (2024) Comparing metal artifact severity and ability to assess near-metal anatomy between 0.55 T and 1.5 T MRI in patients with metallic spinal implants-a scanner comparison study. Acad Radiol 31(6):2456–2463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2023.12.048. Epub 2024 Jan 18. PMID: 38242732 Seifert AC, Breit HC, Schlicht F, Donners R, Harder D, Vosshenrich J (2024) Comparing metal artifact severity and ability to assess near-metal anatomy between 0.55 T and 1.5 T MRI in patients with metallic spinal implants-a scanner comparison study. Acad Radiol 31(6):2456–2463. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​acra.​2023.​12.​048. Epub 2024 Jan 18. PMID: 38242732
11.
13.
go back to reference Lavrova A, Seiberlich N, Kelsey L et al (2024) Comparison of image quality and diagnostic efficacy of routine clinical lumbar spine imaging at 0.55 T and 1.5/3T. Eur J Radiol 175:111406CrossRefPubMed Lavrova A, Seiberlich N, Kelsey L et al (2024) Comparison of image quality and diagnostic efficacy of routine clinical lumbar spine imaging at 0.55 T and 1.5/3T. Eur J Radiol 175:111406CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Schlicht F, Vosshenrich J, Donners R et al (2024) Advanced deep learning-based image reconstruction in lumbar spine MRI at 0.55 T–Effects on image quality and acquisition time in comparison to conventional deep learning-based reconstruction. Eur J Radiol Open 12:100567CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Schlicht F, Vosshenrich J, Donners R et al (2024) Advanced deep learning-based image reconstruction in lumbar spine MRI at 0.55 T–Effects on image quality and acquisition time in comparison to conventional deep learning-based reconstruction. Eur J Radiol Open 12:100567CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Koch KM, Hargreaves BA, Pauly KB et al (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging near metal implants. J Magn Reson Imaging 32(4):773–787CrossRefPubMed Koch KM, Hargreaves BA, Pauly KB et al (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging near metal implants. J Magn Reson Imaging 32(4):773–787CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Clinical MR imaging of patients with spinal hardware at 0.55T: comparison of diagnostic assessment and metal artifact appearance with 1.5T
Authors
Lauren J. Kelsey
Nicole Seiberlich
Jayapalli Bapuraj
Francisco Rivas
Maria Masotti
Vikas Gulani
Shruti Mishra
Publication date
03-02-2025
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Spine Journal
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-025-08701-7