To compare sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of meniscal lesions when operating with a traditional high field MR scanner (1.5 T) and a new concept dedicated MR system (0.31 T). Since the beginning of the ‘90s MR scanners dedicated to the study of the distal joints have been largely used especially inTraumatology.
Thanks to technological progress and improvement of image quality these systems have been progressively introduced to reduce the waiting lists of the traditional...
Methods and Materials
Fifteen patients underwent MR examinations with both the dedicated MR scanner and the high field system between October and December 2010. Inclusion criteria were: age between 18 and 60 years,
clinical suspicion of meniscal lesion,
no history of surgery on the affected knee. Table 1: dedicated 0.31 T MR system: technical details SMF Intensity 0,3 T ± 4 mT Gantry opening Height: 34 cm Width: 18 cm Dual-Phased Array receiving coils Knee:[15*10*14]cm [W*D*H] Ankle/Elbow:[28*15*19]cm Hand/ Wrist:...
Arthroscopy was taken as the gold standard concerning presence (value of "1")or absence (value of "0") of meniscal lesions. For each meniscus anterior and posterior horns were considered,
with the following scores: 0,
absence of lesion; 1,
uncertain interpretation; 2a,
degenerative lesion; 2b,
complete fracture and/or parameniscal cyst and/or bucket handle lesion.
In order to evaluate both Readers' sensitivity and specificity while operating with both systems we considered the "0" score as...
MRI is the gold standard in the imaging study of meniscal lesions. For many years traditional high-field MR systems have been used in traumatology but since the beginning of the '90s thanks to technological progress and improvement of image quality MR systems dedicated to the study of the distal joints have been progressively introduced to reduce the waiting lists of the whole body MR scanners (orthopaedic radiologyaccounts forabout 20% of the total number ofMR exams). New concept dedicated...
Nikken J et al.
( 2005) Acute Peripheral Joint Injury: Cost and Effectiveness of Low-Field-Strength MR Imaging: Results of Randomized Controlled Trial. Radiology 236(3); 958-967. Hayashi N et al.
( 2004) Utilization of Low-Field MR Scanners. Magnetic Resonance in Medical Sciences ; 1(3); 27-38. Tavernier T Cotten A ( 2005) High- Versus Low-Field MR Imaging. Radiologic Clinics of North America 43; 673-681. Parizel P et al.
( 1995) Low-field versus high-field MR imaging of the knee: a...
Bartolozzi. Dipartimento di Oncologia,
dei Trapianti e delle Nuove Tecnologie in Medicina,
Università di Pisa,
Divisione di Radiologia Diagnostica e Interventistica,
Via Roma 67,
Dipartimento di Endocrinologia e Metabolismo,
Ortopedia e Traumatologia,
Medicina del Lavoro,
Università di Pisa,
Via Risorgimento 36,