You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Editorial
What is the role of 3 T MRI in sports medicine? Revisiting the marriage after the honeymoon
  1. Frank W Roemer1,2,
  2. Ali Guermazi2
  1. 1Department of Radiology, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
  2. 2Department of Radiology, Quantitative Imaging Center (QIC), Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Frank W Roemer, Department of Radiology, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Maximiliansplatz 1, Erlangen 91054, Germany; frank.roemer{at}uk-erlangen.de

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2015-095139

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    The first 3 T MRI systems were introduced to clinical practice over a decade ago, and access to these systems has become increasingly available worldwide. Although they were first used for neurological imaging, several studies have demonstrated the abilities and potential advantages of 3 T systems over conventional 1.5 T systems for musculoskeletal disorders, including for their use in sports medicine.1 ,2 The introduction of 3 T MRI generated great expectations in the field, with hope for marked improvement in the diagnosis of musculoskeletal disorders.3

    What does ‘3T’ mean for a clinician? Why should I care?

    Tesla units are used to quantify the strength of a magnet field. In comparison to 1.5 T systems, 3 T MRI is characterised by increased MR signal with relatively less increase in background noise—thus having a higher signal-to-noise ratio (SNR).3 This advantage can be used to either decrease scanning time or improve spatial resolution. The increase in scan speed means increased patient comfort and throughput; increased resolution, especially in combination with surface coils, may prove advantageous for the visualisation of small structures such as the ligaments of the wrist or ankle.4

    While several studies have shown similar or slightly increased diagnostic performance when using 3 T systems over 1.5 T in joint imaging using arthroscopy as a gold standard,1 ,5 ,6 there are no studies using the clinical gold standard of “How often has 3 T changed my treatment decision compared to 1.5 T MRI?” (figure 1).

    Figure 1

    Direct …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests AG received consultancies, speaking fees and/or honoraria from Tissue Gene, Ortho Trophix and Genzyme, and is President of Boston Imaging Core Lab (BICL), a company providing image assessment services. FWR is Chief Medical Officer and shareholder of BICL.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles