» Articles » PMID: 20972564

MR Imaging of the Brachial Plexus: Comparison Between 1.5-T and 3-T MR Imaging: Preliminary Experience

Overview
Journal Skeletal Radiol
Specialties Orthopedics
Radiology
Date 2010 Oct 26
PMID 20972564
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To compare 1.5-T and 3-T magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the brachial plexus.

Materials And Methods: Institutional review board approval and informed consent were obtained from 30 healthy volunteers and 30 consecutive patients with brachial plexus disturbances. MR was prospectively performed with comparable sequence parameters and coils with a 1.5-T and a 3-T system. Imaging protocols at both field strengths included T1-weighted turbo spin-echo (tSE) sequences and T2-weighed turbo spin-echo (tSE) sequences with fat saturation. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) between muscle and nerve were calculated for both field strengths. The visibility of brachial plexus nerve at various anatomic levels (roots, interscalene area, costoclavicular space, and axillary level) was analyzed with a four-point grading scale by two radiologists. MR imaging diagnoses and pathological findings were also compared qualitatively.

Results: SNR and CNRs were significantly higher on 3-T MR images than on 1.5-T MR images (Friedman test) for all sequences. Nerve visibility was significantly better on 3-T MR images than on 1.5-T MR images (paired sign test). Pathological findings (n = 30/30) were seen equally well with both field strengths. MR imaging diagnoses did not differ for the 1.5- and 3-T protocols.

Conclusions: High-quality MR images of the brachial plexus can be obtained with 3-T MR imaging by using sequences similar to those used at 1.5-T MR imaging. In patients and healthy volunteers, the visibility of nerve trunks and cords at 3-T MR imaging appears to be superior to that at 1.5-T MR imaging.

Citing Articles

3D SHINKEI MR neurography in evaluation of traumatic brachial plexus.

Zhang Y, Li X, Liu Y, Sun Y, Duan L, Zhang Y Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):6268.

PMID: 38491150 PMC: 10943192. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-57022-0.


A pentavalent approach for the evaluation of traumatic brachial plexopathy on MRI: correlation of macropattern and micropattern.

Singh D, Kumar N, Bhayana A, Altamash M, Sharma A, Agarwal A Br J Radiol. 2023; 96(1146):20220913.

PMID: 36752595 PMC: 10230398. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20220913.


Magnetic Resonance Neurography of the Brachial Plexus Using 3D SHINKEI: Comparative Evaluation with Conventional Magnetic Resonance Sequences for the Visualization of Anatomy and Detection of Nerve Injury at 1.5T.

Nair P, Mariappan Y, Paruthikunnan S, Kamath A, Rolla N, Saha I J Med Phys. 2021; 46(3):140-147.

PMID: 34703097 PMC: 8491319. DOI: 10.4103/jmp.JMP_13_21.


Improved Brachial Plexus Visualization Using an Adiabatic iMSDE-Prepared STIR 3D TSE.

Klupp E, Cervantes B, Sollmann N, Treibel F, Weidlich D, Baum T Clin Neuroradiol. 2018; 29(4):631-638.

PMID: 30039352 DOI: 10.1007/s00062-018-0706-0.


A dosimetric evaluation on applying RTOG-based and CT/MRI-based delineation methods to brachial plexus in radiotherapy of nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with helical tomotherapy.

Li C, Wu V, Chiu G Br J Radiol. 2018; 92(1102):20170881.

PMID: 29714086 PMC: 6774584. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20170881.


References
1.
Briellmann R, Pell G, Wellard R, Mitchell L, Abbott D, Jackson G . MR imaging of epilepsy: state of the art at 1.5 T and potential of 3 T. Epileptic Disord. 2003; 5(1):3-20. View

2.
Thomas S, Al-Kwifi O, Emery D, Wilman A . Application of magnetization transfer at 3.0 T in three-dimensional time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography of the intracranial arteries. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2002; 15(4):479-83. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.10085. View

3.
Bowen B, Pattany P, Saraf-Lavi E, Maravilla K . The brachial plexus: normal anatomy, pathology, and MR imaging. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2004; 14(1):59-85, vii-viii. DOI: 10.1016/j.nic.2003.12.002. View

4.
Todd M, Shah G, Mukherji S . MR imaging of brachial plexus. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2004; 15(2):113-25. DOI: 10.1097/01.rmr.0000133527.08367.e0. View

5.
Willinek W, Born M, Simon B, Tschampa H, Krautmacher C, Gieseke J . Time-of-flight MR angiography: comparison of 3.0-T imaging and 1.5-T imaging--initial experience. Radiology. 2003; 229(3):913-20. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2293020782. View