RSS-Feed abonnieren

DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1760857
A Novel Portable, Mobile MRI: Comparison with an Established Low-Field Intraoperative MRI System
Autoren
Funding IRB costs and the Hyperfine 0.064 T System were supported by Hyperfine, Inc.
Abstract
Background MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) using low-magnet field strength has unique advantages for intraoperative use. We compared a novel, compact, portable MR imaging system to an established intraoperative 0.15 T system to assess potential utility in intracranial neurosurgery.
Methods Brain images were acquired with a 0.15 T intraoperative MRI (iMRI) system and a 0.064 T portable MR system. Five healthy volunteers were scanned. Individual sequences were rated on a 5-point (1 to 5) scale for six categories: contrast, resolution, coverage, noise, artifacts, and geometry.
Results Overall, the 0.064 T images (M = 3.4, SD = 0.1) had statistically higher ratings than the 0.15 T images (M = 2.4, SD = 0.2) (p < 0.01). All comparable sequences (T1, T2, T2 FLAIR and SSFP) were rated significantly higher on the 0.064 T and were rated 1.2 points (SD = 0.3) higher than 0.15 T scanner, with the T2 fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) sequences showing the largest increment on the 0.064 T with an average rating difference of 1.5 points (SD = 0.2). Scanning time for the 0.064 T system obtained images more quickly and encompassed a larger field of view than the 0.15 T system.
Conclusions A novel, portable 0.064 T self-shielding MRI system under ideal conditions provided images of comparable quality or better and faster acquisition times than those provided by the already well-established 0.15 T iMR system. These results suggest that the 0.064 T MRI has the potential to be adapted for intraoperative use for intracranial neurosurgery.
* These authors contributed equally to the manuscript and retain the first authorship.
Publikationsverlauf
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
22. September 2023
© 2023. Asian Congress of Neurological Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
-
References
- 1 Black PM, Moriarty T, Alexander III 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 Martin C, Alexander III E, Wong T, Schwartz R, Jolesz F, Black PM. Surgical treatment of low-grade gliomas in the intraoperative magnetic resonance imager. Neurosurg Focus 1998; 4 (04) e8
- 3 Hirschl RA, Wilson J, Miller B, Bergese S, Chiocca E. The predictive value of low-field strength magnetic resonance imaging for intraoperative residual tumor detection. Clinical article. J Neurosurg 2009; 111 (02) 252-257
- 4 Livne O, Harel R, Hadani M, Spiegelmann R, Feldman Z, Cohen ZR. Intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging for resection of intra-axial brain lesions: a decade of experience using low-field magnetic resonance imaging, Polestar N-10, 20, 30 systems. World Neurosurg 2014; 82 (05) 770-776
- 5 Olubiyi OI, Ozdemir A, Incekara F. et al. Intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging in intracranial glioma resection: a single-center, retrospective blinded volumetric study. World Neurosurg 2015; 84 (02) 528-536
- 6 Hatiboglu MA, Weinberg JS, Suki D. et al. Impact of intraoperative high-field magnetic resonance imaging guidance on glioma surgery: a prospective volumetric analysis. Neurosurgery 2009; 64 (06) 1073-1081 , discussion 1081
- 7 Leuthardt EC, Lim CC, Shah MN. et al. Use of movable high-field-strength intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging with awake craniotomies for resection of gliomas: preliminary experience. Neurosurgery 2011; 69 (01) 194-205 , discussion 205–206
- 8 Bohinski RJ, Kokkino AK, Warnick RE. et al. Glioma resection in a shared-resource magnetic resonance operating room after optimal image-guided frameless stereotactic resection. Neurosurgery 2001; 48 (04) 731-742 , discussion 742–744
- 9 Senft C, Seifert V, Hermann E, Franz K, Gasser T. Usefulness of intraoperative ultra low-field magnetic resonance imaging in glioma surgery. Neurosurgery 2008; 63 (4, Suppl 2) 257-266 , discussion 266–267
- 10 Leroy HA, Delmaire C, Le Rhun E, Drumez E, Lejeune JP, Reyns N. High-field intraoperative MRI and glioma surgery: results after the first 100 consecutive patients. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2019; 161 (07) 1467-1474
- 11 Salas S, Brimacombe M, Schulder M. Stereotactic accuracy of a compact intraoperative MRI system. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 2007; 85 (2–3): 69-74
- 12 Abraham P, Sarkar R, Brandel MG. et al. Cost-effectiveness of intraoperative MRI for treatment of high-grade gliomas. Radiology 2019; 291 (03) 689-697
- 13 Cui Z, Pan L, Song H. et al. Intraoperative MRI for optimizing electrode placement for deep brain stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus in Parkinson disease. J Neurosurg 2016; 124 (01) 62-69
- 14 Kurwale NS, Chandra SP, Chouksey P. et al. Impact of intraoperative MRI on outcomes in epilepsy surgery: preliminary experience of two years. Br J Neurosurg 2015; 29 (03) 380-385
- 15 Tatsui CE, Nascimento CNG, Suki D. et al. Image guidance based on MRI for spinal interstitial laser thermotherapy: technical aspects and accuracy. J Neurosurg Spine 2017; 26 (05) 605-612
- 16 White T, Zavarella S, Jarchin L, Nardi D, Schaffer S, Schulder M. Combined brain mapping and compact intraoperative MRI for brain tumor resection. Stereotact Funct Neurosurg 2018; 96 (03) 172-181
- 17 Hadani M, Spiegelman R, Feldman Z, Berkenstadt H, Ram Z. Novel, compact, intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging-guided system for conventional neurosurgical operating rooms. Neurosurgery 2001; 48 (04) 799-807 , discussion 807–809
- 18 Gerlach R, du Mesnil de Rochemont R, Gasser T. et al. Feasibility of Polestar N20, an ultra-low-field intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging system in resection control of pituitary macroadenomas: lessons learned from the first 40 cases. Neurosurgery 2008; 63 (02) 272-284 , discussion 284–285
- 19 Makary M, Chiocca EA, Erminy N. et al. Clinical and economic outcomes of low-field intraoperative MRI-guided tumor resection neurosurgery. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011; 34 (05) 1022-1030
- 20 Garcia-Garcia S, García-Lorenzo B, Ramos PR. et al. Cost-effectiveness of low-field intraoperative magnetic resonance in glioma surgery. Front Oncol 2020; 10: 586679
- 21 Sheth KN, Mazurek MH, Yuen MM, Cahn BA, Shah JT, Ward A, Kim JA, Gilmore EJ, Falcone GJ, Petersen N, Gobeske KT. Assessment of brain injury using portable, low-field magnetic resonance imaging at the bedside of critically ill patients. JAMA neurology 2021; 78 (01) 41-47
- 22 Turpin J, Unadkat P, Thomas J. et al. Portable magnetic resonance imaging for ICU patients. Crit Care Explor 2020; 2 (12) e0306
- 23 Hyperfine;. 2021 Accessed November 16, 2022, at: https://hyperfine.io/product/#subscriptionservice
- 24 Schulder M. Intracranial surgery with a compact, low-field-strength magnetic resonance imager. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2009; 19 (04) 179-189
- 25 Ntoukas V, Krishnan R, Seifert V. The new generation polestar n20 for conventional neurosurgical operating rooms: a preliminary report. Neurosurgery 2008; 62 (3, Suppl 1) 82-89 , discussion 89–90
- 26 Deoni SCL, O'Muircheartaigh J, Ljungberg E, Huentelman M, Williams SCR. Simultaneous high-resolution T2 -weighted imaging and quantitative T2 mapping at low magnetic field strengths using a multiple TE and multi-orientation acquisition approach. Magn Reson Med 2022; 88 (03) 1273-1281
- 27 Zwart NR, Johnson KO, Pipe JG. Efficient sample density estimation by combining gridding and an optimized kernel. Magn Reson Med 2012; 67 (03) 701-710
