Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare the image quality, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of an open low-field MR system (0.2 T) with a standard high-field MR system (1.5 T) after arthrography of the shoulder. Thirty-eight patients either with suspected chronic instability (n=12) or rotator cuff abnormalities (n=26) were examined. In-tra-articular injection of diluted Gd-DTPA was followed in randomized order either first by imaging on an open 0.2-T system or on a 1.5-T system. The image material was evaluated independently by two radiologists in a blinded fashion with respect to overall image quality and the detection of rotator cuff as well as capsular and labral abnormalities. Surgical correlation was available in 27 (71%) of 38 patients. For both systems, sensitivity and specificity for rotator cuff tears were 100% each, and for labrum pathologies, these values were 100 and 93%, respectively. The agreement for detection of labral pathologies between low-field and high-field examinations was good (ϰ=0.69, ϰ=0.61). For the detection of full-thickness tears of the rotator cuff, the agreement between the low-field and high-field MR examinations was very good and significant (ϰ=0.94, ϰ=1, p<0.001). Overall image quality was rated good in 17 (45 %) and fair in 21 (55 %) of 38 cases on the 0.2-T MR system, and good in 32 (84%) and fair in 6 (16%) of 38 cases on the 1.5-T system. Motion artifacts were considered low in 24 (63 %) and moderate in 14 (37 %) of 38 cases for the 0.2-T system and low in 34 (89%) and moderate in 4 (11 %) for 1.5-T system. Based on our results, low-field MR compares favorably to high-field MR in the detection of major abnormalities of the glenohumeral joint, at least when MR arthrography is used. Disadvantages are the duration of the examination and thus the risk of reduced image quality caused by motion artifacts.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Stiles RG, Otte MT (1993) Imaging of the shoulder. Radiology 188: 603–613
Chandnani V, Ho C, Gerharter J, Neuman C, Kursunoglu-Brahme S, Sartoris DJ, Resnick D (1992) MR findings in asymptomatic shoulders: a blind analysis using symptomatic shoulders as controls. Clin Imaging 16: 25–30
Schweitzer ME, Magbalon MJ, Fenlin JM, Frieman BG, Ehrlich SE, Epstein RE (1995) Effusion criteria and clinical importance of glenohumeral joint fluid: MR imaging evaluation. Radiology 194:821–824
Palmer WE, Caslowitz PL, Chew FS (1995) MR arthrography of the shoulder: normal intraarticular structures and common abnormalities. AJR 164:141–146
Chandnani V, Yeager TD, DeBerardino T et al. (1993) Glenoid labral tears. MR arthrography and CT arthrography. AJR 161: 1229–1235
Chandnani V, Gagliardi JA, Murnane TG et al. (1995) Glenohumeral ligaments and shoulder capsular mechanism: evaluation with MR arthrography. Radiology 196: 27–32
Tirman PFJ, Stauffer AE, Crues JV et al. (1993) Saline magnetic resonance arthrography of glenohumeral instability. Arthroscopy 9: 550–559
Tirman PFJ, Bost FW, Garvin GJ et al. (1994) Posterosuperior glenoid impingement of the shoulder: findings at MR imaging and MR arthrography with arthroscopic correlation. Radiology 193: 431–436
Flannigan B, Kursunoglu-Brahme SK, Snyder S (1990) MR arthrography of the shoulder: comparison with conventional MR imaging. AJR 155: 829–832
Hodler J, Kursunoglu-Brahme S, Snyder SJ (1992) Rotator cuff disease: assessment with MR arthrography versus standard MR imaging in 36 patients with arthroscopic confirmation. Radiology 182: 431–436
Needell SD, Zlatkin MB (1997) Comparison of fat-saturation fast spin echo versus conventional spin echo MRI in the detection of rotator cuff pathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 7: 674–677
Palmer WE, Brown JH, Rosenthal DI (1993) Rotator cuff: evaluation with fat-suppressed MR arthrography. Radiology 188: 683–687
Palmer WE (1996) MR arthrography: Is it worthwhile? Top Magn Reson Imaging 8: 24–43
Bachmann G, Bauer T, Jürgensen I, Schwab J, Weimar B, Rau WS (1998) Diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic relevance of CT arthrography and MR arthrography of the shoulder joint. Fortschr Röntgenstr 168:149–156
Traughber PD, Goodwin TE (1992) Shoulder MRI. Arthroscopic correlation with emphasis on partial tears. J Comput Assist Tomogr 16:129–133
Carrino JA, McCauley TR, Katz LD, Smith RC, Lange RC (1997) Rotator cuff: evaluation with fast spin-echo versus conventional spin-echo MR imaging. Radiology 202: 533–539
Kopka L, Funke F, Fischer U, Keating D, Oestmann J, Grabbe E (1994) MR arthrography of the shoulder with gadopentetate dimeglimine: influence of concentration, iodinated contrast material, and time on signal intensity. AJR 163: 621–623
Needell SD, Zlatkin MB, Sher JS, Murphy BJ, Uribe JW (1996) MR imaging of the rotator cuff: peritendinous and bone abnormalities in an asymptomatic population. AJR 166: 863–867
Bigliani LU, Morrsion DS (1986) The morphology of the acromion and its relationship to rotator cuff tears. Orthop Trans 10: 228
Epstein RE, Schweitzer ME, Frieman BG, Fenlin JM Jr, Mitchell DG (1993) Hooked acromion: prevalence on MR images of painful shoulders. Radiology 187: 479–481
Zlatkin MB, Bjorkengren AG, Gylys-Morin V, Resnick D, Sartoris DJ (1988) Cross sectional imaging of the capsular mechanism of the glenohumeral joint. AJR 150:151–158
Whimster WF (1997) Biomedical research. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 60–62
Robertson PL, Schweitzer ME, Mitchell DG, Schlesinger F, Epstein RE, Frieman BG, Fenlin JM (1995) Rotator cuff disorders: interobserver and intraobserver variation in diagnosis with MR imaging. Radiology 194: 831–835
Kersting-Sommerhoff B, Gerhardt P, Golder W, Hof N, Riel K-H, Helmberger H, Lenz M, Lehner K (1995) MRT des Kniegelenkes. Erste Ergebnisse eines Vergleichs von 0.2 T-Spezialsystem mit 1.5 T Hochfeldmagnet. Fortschr Röntgenstr 162: 390–395
Kersting-Sommerhoff B, Hof N, Lenz M, Gerhardt P (1996) MRI of peripheral joints with a low-field dedictated system: a reliable and cost effective alternative to highfield units? Eur J Radiol 6: 561–565
Allmann K-H, Walter O, Laubenberger J, Uhl M, Buitrago-Tellez C-H, Biebow N, Langer M (1998): Magnetic resonance diagnosis of the anterior labrum and capsule. Effect of field strength and efficacy. Invest Radiol 33: 415–420
Graichen H, Bonel H, Stammberger T, Haubner M, Rohrer H, Englmeier KH, Reiser M, Eckstein F (1999) Three dimensional analysis of the width of the subacromial space in healthy subjects and patients with impingement syndrome. AJR 172: 1081–1086
Heteren JG van, James JW, Bourne LC (1994) Thin film high temperature superconducting RF coils. Magn Reson Med 32: 396–400
Peterfly CG, Roberts T, Genant HK (1997) Dedicated extremity MR imaging. Radiol Clin North Am 35:1–20
Quinn SF, Sheley RC, Demlow TA (1995) Rotator cuff tendon tears: evaluation with fat-suppressed MR imaging with arthroscopic correlation in 100 patients. Radiology 195: 497–501
Tien RD (1992) Fat-suppression MR imaging in neuroradiology: techniques and clinical application. AJR 158: 369–372
Shuman WP, Patten RM, Baron RL, Liddell RM, Conrad EU, Richardson ML (1991) Comparison of STIR and spin-echo MR imaging at 1.5 T in 45 suspected extremity tumors: lesion conspicuity and extent. Radiology 179: 247–252
Tuite MJ, De Smet AA, Norris MA, Orwin JF (1995) MR diagnosis of labral tears of the shoulder: value of T2*-weighted gradient-recalled echo images made in external rotation. AJR 164: 941–944
Low R, Kreitner KF, Runkel M, Zöllner J, Thelen M (1998) Niederfeld MR-Arthrographie der Schulter: Erste Ergebnisse mit einem offenen 0.2 T MR System. Fortschr Röntgenstr 168: 1–7
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Loew, R., Kreitner, K.F., Runkel, M. et al. MR arthrography of the shoulder: comparison of low-field (0,2 T) vs high-field (1.5 T) imaging. Eur. Radiol. 10, 989–996 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/s003300051050
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s003300051050