Breast MRI artefacts: Evaluation and solutions in 630 consecutive patients

Aim To evaluate the problems that may arise in breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) related to the presence of artefacts and pitfalls, in order to improve its accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. Materials and methods Six hundred and thirty breast MRI examinations performed using a 1.5 T magne...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical radiology 2013-11, Vol.68 (11), p.e601-e608
Hauptverfasser: Fiaschetti, V, Pistolese, C.A, Funel, V, Rascioni, M, Claroni, G, Della Gatta, F, Cossu, E, Perretta, T, Simonetti, G
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Aim To evaluate the problems that may arise in breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) related to the presence of artefacts and pitfalls, in order to improve its accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. Materials and methods Six hundred and thirty breast MRI examinations performed using a 1.5 T magnet were analysed retrospectively. Each type of artefact that may have affected the correct interpretation of the acquired images was considered and analysed. In particular, the presence of technical artefacts, which are related to patient-dependent factors or to the examination itself, and non-technical artefacts, which are the result of inadequate and incorrect image interpretation occurring in absence of technical issues, were examined. In every case of suspicious findings, doubtful lesions were subjected to histological characterization for appropriate therapeutic planning. In the remainder of cases, patients underwent follow-up for at least 18 months. Results Artefacts were found in 33% of all examinations, among those 48.6% were caused by movement, 33.6% were due to non-homogeneous or failed fat saturation, 8.7% to incorrect positioning of the patient, 7.2% to metallic artefacts, 1.4% to aliasing, and 0.5% were “zebra artefacts”. When the artefact was identified in a sequence, the sequence was performed a second time after corrective measures. No artefacts affected diagnostic interpretation of the obtained images. Conclusion The present study provides a specific and precise review of the most frequent artefacts with a discussion of possible and practical solutions. A highly qualified team is required to perform accurate diagnostic tests and to limit or remove the possibility of misinterpretation.
ISSN:0009-9260
1365-229X
DOI:10.1016/j.crad.2013.05.103