CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · J Neuroanaesth Crit Care 2018; 05(03): 177-183
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1673503
Brief Report
Indian Society of Neuroanaesthesiology and Critical Care

Setting Up Workflow of an Intraoperative MRI Unit: A Single-Centre Experience of First 53 Cases

Nitin Manohar
1   Department of Neuroanesthesiology, Yashoda Hospitals, Secunderabad, Telengana, India
Deviprasad Mohapatra
1   Department of Neuroanesthesiology, Yashoda Hospitals, Secunderabad, Telengana, India
Anandh Balasubramaniam
2   Department of Neurosurgery, Yashoda hospitals, Secunderabad, Telengana, India
Keerthi Rao
3   Department of Anaesthesiology, Rainbow Children's Hospital, Hyderabad
Deepti Srinivas
4   Department of Neuroanaesthesia and Neurocritical Care, Apollo Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
Dhritiman Chakrabarti
5   Department of Neuroanaesthesia and Neurocritical care, National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
› Author Affiliations
Funding None.
Further Information

Publication History

Received: 03 May 2018

Accepted after revision: 28 August 2018

Publication Date:
10 October 2018 (online)


Background Setting up of a new “nearby” operation room type intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging (iMRI) unit poses a unique set of challenges to the operating team. We describe here an account of our experiences and a step by step protocol designed by us and followed to troubleshoot the issues encountered. The primary objective of the study was to observe our learning curve in the process of setting up of a new iMRI unit. The secondary objectives were to look at the number of residues detected, quality of imaging, and complications during iMRI.

Materials and Methods An observational study was conducted over a 3-month period involving cases requiring iMRI. Initially, a simulation was performed using healthy volunteers, which helped in developing a systematic protocol and drafting checklists to ensure a smooth workflow pattern. Data collection included details regarding hindrances encountered, how these were tackled, iMRI details (residual tumor, re-surgery), and complications, if any.

Results A total of 53 cases underwent iMRI in the study period. Among these, 51 were tumor cases that revealed residue (detected in 28 [54.9%] cases), and re-surgery for further resection was performed in 21/28 (75%) cases. A very high level of surgeons’ satisfaction regarding image quality of intraoperative scan was recorded (45/53 [84%]). The number of personnel required for shifting and shifting times could be reduced with efficient utilization of the checklist.

Conclusion A methodical approach to tackle impediments while setting up a new unit such as iMRI facilitates its smooth functioning and ensures minimal interruptions and evades undue complications.

  • References

  • 1 Black PM, Moriarty T, Alexander E. et al. Development and implementation of intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging and its neurosurgical applications. Neurosurgery 1997; 41 (04) 831-842 discussion 842–845
  • 2 Black PM, Alexander E, Martin C. et al. Craniotomy for tumor treatment in an intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging unit. Neurosurgery 1999; 45 (03) 423-431 discussion 431–433
  • 3 Berkenstadt H, Perel A, Ram Z, Feldman Z, Nahtomi-Shick O, Hadani M. Anesthesia for magnetic resonance guided neurosurgery: initial experience with a new open magnetic resonance imaging system. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 2001; 13 (02) 158-162
  • 4 Darcey TM, Kobylarz EJ, Pearl MA. et al. Safe use of subdermal needles for intraoperative monitoring with MRI. Neurosurg Focus 2016; 40 (03) E19
  • 5 Archer DP, Manninen PH, Mctaggart-cowan RA. Anesthetic considerations for neurosurgery using intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Tech Neurosurg 2002; 7 (04) 308-312
  • 6 Schmitz B, Nimsky C, Wendel G. et al. Anesthesia during high-field intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging experience with 80 consecutive cases. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 2003; 15 (03) 255-262
  • 7 Tan TK, Goh J. The anaesthetist's role in the setting up of an intraoperative MR imaging facility. Singapore Med J 2009; 50 (01) 4-10
  • 8 Netuka D, Masopust V, Belŝán T, Kramář F, Beneŝ V. One year experience with 3.0 T intraoperative MRI in pituitary surgery. Acta Neurochir Suppl (Wien) 2011; 109: 157-159
  • 9 Chen X, Xu BN, Meng X, Zhang J, Yu X, Zhou D. Dual-room 1.5-T intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging suite with a movable magnet: implementation and preliminary experience. Neurosurg Rev 2012; 35 (01) 95-109 discussion 109–110
  • 10 Ginat DT, Swearingen B, Curry W, Cahill D, Madsen J, Schaefer PW. 3 Tesla intraoperative MRI for brain tumor surgery. J Magn Reson Imaging 2014; 39 (06) 1357-1365
  • 11 Zheng X, Xu X, Zhang H. et al. A preliminary experience with use of intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging in thalamic glioma surgery: a case series of 38 patients. World Neurosurg 2016; 89: 434-441
  • 12 Berkow LC. Anesthetic management and human factors in the intraoperative MRI environment. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2016; 29 (05) 563-567
  • 13 Rahmathulla G, Recinos PF, Traul DE. et al. Surgical briefings, checklists, and the creation of an environment of safety in the neurosurgical intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging suite. Neurosurg Focus 2012; 33 (05) E12
  • 14 Johnston T, Moser R, Moeller K, Moriarty TM. Intraoperative MRI: safety. Neurosurg Clin N Am 2009; 20 (02) 147-153
  • 15 Bergese SD, Puente EG. Anesthesia in the intraoperative MRI environment. Neurosurg Clin N Am 2009; 20 (02) 155-162
  • 16 Marongiu A, D'Andrea G, Raco A. 1.5-T field Intraoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Improves Extent of Resection and Survival in glioblastoma removal. World Neurosurg 2017; 98: 578-586