Comparison of low field (0.2T) and high field (1.5T) MR imaging in the differentiation of torned from intact menisci

Purpose: To evaluate the usefulness of a low field MRI system (0.2T; Esaote, Biomedica) for the evaluation of meniscal tears with regard to anatomic site, and to compare the results with findings from a high field unit (1.5T; Siemens, Erlangen). Material and Methods: MRI was performed in 25 patients...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of radiology 1999-04, Vol.30 (1), p.22-27
Hauptverfasser: Rand, T., Imhof, H., Turetschek, K., Schneider, B., Vögele, T., Gäbler, C., Trattnig, S.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 27
container_issue 1
container_start_page 22
container_title European journal of radiology
container_volume 30
creator Rand, T.
Imhof, H.
Turetschek, K.
Schneider, B.
Vögele, T.
Gäbler, C.
Trattnig, S.
description Purpose: To evaluate the usefulness of a low field MRI system (0.2T; Esaote, Biomedica) for the evaluation of meniscal tears with regard to anatomic site, and to compare the results with findings from a high field unit (1.5T; Siemens, Erlangen). Material and Methods: MRI was performed in 25 patients in a low field (0.2T; Esaote, Biomedica), and a high field (1.5T; Siemens, Erlangen) MRI unit. The images were analyzed for the presence or absence of meniscal tears and the confidence of decision making. Results were further analyzed for the number of identical and unidentical findings on both imaging modalities. In seven patients, arthroscopy was performed and the findings compared with the results from MR imaging. Statistical analysis was performed by χ 2-test, Wilcoxon test and Friedman analysis. Results: Qualitative evaluation of the level of confidence in decision making was significantly superior on high field strength images. When comparing the evaluations from both image modalities in 21 of 25 patients (84%), the diagnosis concerning the presence or absence of meniscal tears was identical. Conclusion: Although low field MR imaging might offer diagnostic potential concerning the presence or absence of meniscal tears, the level of confidence in decision making is significantly superior with high field strength imaging, probably reflecting the higher conspicuity of lesions from high field strength units.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/S0720-048X(98)00108-9
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69856917</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0720048X98001089</els_id><sourcerecordid>20095003</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c390t-41ba901e0f23bc80b0b1ae522d8d5522cc8bfa93251ed3ddaaaf3b1ba2632a213</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkVFrFDEUhYModlv9CUqepH2Y7U2ys5M8SVmsCpWCVvAtZJKb3cjMZE2yFv-9aacW3_p04fKdc-AcQt4wWDJg6_Nv0HFoYCV_nCp5BsBANuoZWTDZ8abrePecLB6RI3Kc808AaFeKvyRHDIRUAHJByiaOe5NCjhONng7xlvqAg6OnsOQ3Z9RMju7Cdvfvy5Zt_X75SsNotmHa0jDRskPqgveYcCrBlDB7lZgmdNSnOFaqGFvoiFPINrwiL7wZMr5-uCfk--WHm82n5ur64-fNxVVjhYLSrFhvFDAEz0VvJfTQM4Mt5066th5rZe-NErxl6IRzxhgv-iria8ENZ-KEvJt99yn-OmAueqzxOAxmwnjIeq1ku1asexLkAKoFEBVsZ9CmmHNCr_epNpH-aAb6bhd9v4u-K10rqe930arq3j4EHPoR3X-qeYgKvJ8BrH38Dph07Qkniy4ktEW7GJ6I-Augu5w1</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>20095003</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of low field (0.2T) and high field (1.5T) MR imaging in the differentiation of torned from intact menisci</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Rand, T. ; Imhof, H. ; Turetschek, K. ; Schneider, B. ; Vögele, T. ; Gäbler, C. ; Trattnig, S.</creator><creatorcontrib>Rand, T. ; Imhof, H. ; Turetschek, K. ; Schneider, B. ; Vögele, T. ; Gäbler, C. ; Trattnig, S.</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose: To evaluate the usefulness of a low field MRI system (0.2T; Esaote, Biomedica) for the evaluation of meniscal tears with regard to anatomic site, and to compare the results with findings from a high field unit (1.5T; Siemens, Erlangen). Material and Methods: MRI was performed in 25 patients in a low field (0.2T; Esaote, Biomedica), and a high field (1.5T; Siemens, Erlangen) MRI unit. The images were analyzed for the presence or absence of meniscal tears and the confidence of decision making. Results were further analyzed for the number of identical and unidentical findings on both imaging modalities. In seven patients, arthroscopy was performed and the findings compared with the results from MR imaging. Statistical analysis was performed by χ 2-test, Wilcoxon test and Friedman analysis. Results: Qualitative evaluation of the level of confidence in decision making was significantly superior on high field strength images. When comparing the evaluations from both image modalities in 21 of 25 patients (84%), the diagnosis concerning the presence or absence of meniscal tears was identical. Conclusion: Although low field MR imaging might offer diagnostic potential concerning the presence or absence of meniscal tears, the level of confidence in decision making is significantly superior with high field strength imaging, probably reflecting the higher conspicuity of lesions from high field strength units.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0720-048X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-7727</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0720-048X(98)00108-9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 10389008</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ireland: Elsevier Ireland Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Arthroscopy ; Decision Making ; Diagnosis ; Diagnostic confidence ; Female ; Humans ; Image analysis ; Low field MR imaging ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods ; Male ; Medical imaging ; Meniscal tears ; Musculoskeletal system ; Statistical tests ; Tibial Meniscus Injuries</subject><ispartof>European journal of radiology, 1999-04, Vol.30 (1), p.22-27</ispartof><rights>1999 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c390t-41ba901e0f23bc80b0b1ae522d8d5522cc8bfa93251ed3ddaaaf3b1ba2632a213</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c390t-41ba901e0f23bc80b0b1ae522d8d5522cc8bfa93251ed3ddaaaf3b1ba2632a213</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0720-048X(98)00108-9$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10389008$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rand, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Imhof, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turetschek, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schneider, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vögele, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gäbler, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trattnig, S.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of low field (0.2T) and high field (1.5T) MR imaging in the differentiation of torned from intact menisci</title><title>European journal of radiology</title><addtitle>Eur J Radiol</addtitle><description>Purpose: To evaluate the usefulness of a low field MRI system (0.2T; Esaote, Biomedica) for the evaluation of meniscal tears with regard to anatomic site, and to compare the results with findings from a high field unit (1.5T; Siemens, Erlangen). Material and Methods: MRI was performed in 25 patients in a low field (0.2T; Esaote, Biomedica), and a high field (1.5T; Siemens, Erlangen) MRI unit. The images were analyzed for the presence or absence of meniscal tears and the confidence of decision making. Results were further analyzed for the number of identical and unidentical findings on both imaging modalities. In seven patients, arthroscopy was performed and the findings compared with the results from MR imaging. Statistical analysis was performed by χ 2-test, Wilcoxon test and Friedman analysis. Results: Qualitative evaluation of the level of confidence in decision making was significantly superior on high field strength images. When comparing the evaluations from both image modalities in 21 of 25 patients (84%), the diagnosis concerning the presence or absence of meniscal tears was identical. Conclusion: Although low field MR imaging might offer diagnostic potential concerning the presence or absence of meniscal tears, the level of confidence in decision making is significantly superior with high field strength imaging, probably reflecting the higher conspicuity of lesions from high field strength units.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Arthroscopy</subject><subject>Decision Making</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>Diagnostic confidence</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image analysis</subject><subject>Low field MR imaging</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical imaging</subject><subject>Meniscal tears</subject><subject>Musculoskeletal system</subject><subject>Statistical tests</subject><subject>Tibial Meniscus Injuries</subject><issn>0720-048X</issn><issn>1872-7727</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1999</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkVFrFDEUhYModlv9CUqepH2Y7U2ys5M8SVmsCpWCVvAtZJKb3cjMZE2yFv-9aacW3_p04fKdc-AcQt4wWDJg6_Nv0HFoYCV_nCp5BsBANuoZWTDZ8abrePecLB6RI3Kc808AaFeKvyRHDIRUAHJByiaOe5NCjhONng7xlvqAg6OnsOQ3Z9RMju7Cdvfvy5Zt_X75SsNotmHa0jDRskPqgveYcCrBlDB7lZgmdNSnOFaqGFvoiFPINrwiL7wZMr5-uCfk--WHm82n5ur64-fNxVVjhYLSrFhvFDAEz0VvJfTQM4Mt5066th5rZe-NErxl6IRzxhgv-iria8ENZ-KEvJt99yn-OmAueqzxOAxmwnjIeq1ku1asexLkAKoFEBVsZ9CmmHNCr_epNpH-aAb6bhd9v4u-K10rqe930arq3j4EHPoR3X-qeYgKvJ8BrH38Dph07Qkniy4ktEW7GJ6I-Augu5w1</recordid><startdate>19990401</startdate><enddate>19990401</enddate><creator>Rand, T.</creator><creator>Imhof, H.</creator><creator>Turetschek, K.</creator><creator>Schneider, B.</creator><creator>Vögele, T.</creator><creator>Gäbler, C.</creator><creator>Trattnig, S.</creator><general>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TC</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19990401</creationdate><title>Comparison of low field (0.2T) and high field (1.5T) MR imaging in the differentiation of torned from intact menisci</title><author>Rand, T. ; Imhof, H. ; Turetschek, K. ; Schneider, B. ; Vögele, T. ; Gäbler, C. ; Trattnig, S.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c390t-41ba901e0f23bc80b0b1ae522d8d5522cc8bfa93251ed3ddaaaf3b1ba2632a213</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1999</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Arthroscopy</topic><topic>Decision Making</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>Diagnostic confidence</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image analysis</topic><topic>Low field MR imaging</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical imaging</topic><topic>Meniscal tears</topic><topic>Musculoskeletal system</topic><topic>Statistical tests</topic><topic>Tibial Meniscus Injuries</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rand, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Imhof, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turetschek, K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schneider, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vögele, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gäbler, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trattnig, S.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Mechanical Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rand, T.</au><au>Imhof, H.</au><au>Turetschek, K.</au><au>Schneider, B.</au><au>Vögele, T.</au><au>Gäbler, C.</au><au>Trattnig, S.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of low field (0.2T) and high field (1.5T) MR imaging in the differentiation of torned from intact menisci</atitle><jtitle>European journal of radiology</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Radiol</addtitle><date>1999-04-01</date><risdate>1999</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>22</spage><epage>27</epage><pages>22-27</pages><issn>0720-048X</issn><eissn>1872-7727</eissn><abstract>Purpose: To evaluate the usefulness of a low field MRI system (0.2T; Esaote, Biomedica) for the evaluation of meniscal tears with regard to anatomic site, and to compare the results with findings from a high field unit (1.5T; Siemens, Erlangen). Material and Methods: MRI was performed in 25 patients in a low field (0.2T; Esaote, Biomedica), and a high field (1.5T; Siemens, Erlangen) MRI unit. The images were analyzed for the presence or absence of meniscal tears and the confidence of decision making. Results were further analyzed for the number of identical and unidentical findings on both imaging modalities. In seven patients, arthroscopy was performed and the findings compared with the results from MR imaging. Statistical analysis was performed by χ 2-test, Wilcoxon test and Friedman analysis. Results: Qualitative evaluation of the level of confidence in decision making was significantly superior on high field strength images. When comparing the evaluations from both image modalities in 21 of 25 patients (84%), the diagnosis concerning the presence or absence of meniscal tears was identical. Conclusion: Although low field MR imaging might offer diagnostic potential concerning the presence or absence of meniscal tears, the level of confidence in decision making is significantly superior with high field strength imaging, probably reflecting the higher conspicuity of lesions from high field strength units.</abstract><cop>Ireland</cop><pub>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</pub><pmid>10389008</pmid><doi>10.1016/S0720-048X(98)00108-9</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0720-048X
ispartof European journal of radiology, 1999-04, Vol.30 (1), p.22-27
issn 0720-048X
1872-7727
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69856917
source MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Adult
Arthroscopy
Decision Making
Diagnosis
Diagnostic confidence
Female
Humans
Image analysis
Low field MR imaging
Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods
Male
Medical imaging
Meniscal tears
Musculoskeletal system
Statistical tests
Tibial Meniscus Injuries
title Comparison of low field (0.2T) and high field (1.5T) MR imaging in the differentiation of torned from intact menisci
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T01%3A18%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20low%20field%20(0.2T)%20and%20high%20field%20(1.5T)%20MR%20imaging%20in%20the%20differentiation%20of%20torned%20from%20intact%20menisci&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20radiology&rft.au=Rand,%20T.&rft.date=1999-04-01&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=22&rft.epage=27&rft.pages=22-27&rft.issn=0720-048X&rft.eissn=1872-7727&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0720-048X(98)00108-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E20095003%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=20095003&rft_id=info:pmid/10389008&rft_els_id=S0720048X98001089&rfr_iscdi=true