STIR sequence with increased receiver bandwidth of the inversion pulse for reduction of metallic artifacts

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 199, Issue 6, 2012, Pages

  Ulbrich, Erika J ^a   Sutter, Reto ^a   Aguiar, Ranieri F ^b   Nittka, Mathias ^c   Pfirrmann, Christian W ^a  

^a ORTHOPEDIC UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL BALGRIST   (Switzerland)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^c SIEMENS AG   (Germany)

Author keywords

High bandwidth; Metal artifact reduction; MRI; STIR

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; ARTIFACT REDUCTION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL FEATURE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HIP PROSTHESIS; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE DISPLAY; IMAGE DISTORTION; IMAGE QUALITY; INSUFFICIENT FAT SUPPRESSION; KNEE PROSTHESIS; MALE; METAL IMPLANTATION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; OPTIMIZED INVERSION PULSE NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING STIR SEQUENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTHESIS; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SCORING SYSTEM; SPINE PROSTHESIS;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARTIFACTS; FEMALE; HIP PROSTHESIS; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; KNEE PROSTHESIS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; METALS; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; SPINAL FUSION; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC;

EID: 84870866516     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: 15463141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.8233     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Potter HG, Nestor BJ, Sofka CM, Ho ST, Peters LE, Salvati EA. Magnetic resonance imaging after total hip arthroplasty: evaluation of periprosthetic soft tissue. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86:1947-1954 (Pubitemid 39223463)
2. Guermazi A, Miaux Y, Zaim S, Peterfy CG, White D, Genant HK. Metallic artefacts in MR imaging: effects of main field orientation and strength. Clin Radiol 2003; 58:322-328 (Pubitemid 36416977)
3. White LM, Buckwalter KA. Technical considerations: CT and MR imaging in the postoperative orthopedic patient. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2002; 6:5-17 (Pubitemid 34258306)
4. Harris CA, White LM. Metal artifact reduction in musculoskeletal magnetic resonance imaging. Orthop Clin North Am 2006; 37:349-359 (Pubitemid 44041515)
5. Lee MJ, Kim S, Lee SA, et al. Overcoming artifacts from metallic orthopedic implants at high-field-strength MR imaging and multi-detector CT. RadioGraphics 2007; 27:791-803
6. Viano AM, Gronemeyer SA, Haliloglu M, Hoffer FA. Improved MR imaging for patients with metallic implants. Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 18:287-295 (Pubitemid 30220703)
7. Koch KM, Hargreaves BA, Pauly KB, Chen W, Gold GE, King KF. Magnetic resonance imaging near metal implants. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010; 32:773-787
8. Bakker CJ, Bhagwandien R, Moerland MA, Fuderer M. Susceptibility artifacts in 2DFT spin-echo and gradient-echo imaging: the cylinder model revisited. Magn Reson Imaging 1993; 11:539-548
9. Bakker CJ, Bhagwandien R, Moerland MA, Ramos LM. Simulation of susceptibility artifacts in 2D and 3D Fourier transform spin-echo and gradient-echo magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 1994; 12:767-774 (Pubitemid 24226670)
10. Petersilge CA, Lewin JS, Duerk JL, Yoo JU, Ghaneyem AJ. Optimizing imaging parameters for MR evaluation of the spine with titanium pedicle screws. AJR 1996; 166:1213-1218 (Pubitemid 26122975)
11. Hargreaves BA, Worters PW, Pauly KB, Pauly JM, Koch KM, Gold GE. Metal-induced artifacts in MRI. AJR 2011; 197:547-555
12. Lu W, Pauly KB, Gold GE, Pauly JM, Hargreaves BA. SEMAC: slice encoding for metal artifact correction in MRI. Magn Reson Med 2009; 62:66-76