Artifacts in Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Spine After Surgery with or Without Implant

Overview

Journal Eur Spine J

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 1994 Jan 1

PMID 7866844

Citations 3

Authors

H Leclet

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is often disturbed after spine surgical procedures with or without an implant. Artifacts are induced by ferromagnetic or nonferromagnetic implants and devices and by small metallic particles left by surgical instruments. All metallic artifacts can affect the quality and usefulness of postoperative spine MR examinations. The physical effects caused by the introduction of metal or other conductive materials into a magnetic field and their consequences are presented. The application to postoperative spine MR examinations and solutions to reduce artifacts are discussed.

Citing Articles

Carbon-based pedicle screw fixation for lumbar fusion for degenerative pathologies in a cancer patient requiring radiotherapy.

Mobbs R, Liu D J Surg Case Rep. 2025; 2025(2):rjaf065.

PMID: 40007563 PMC: 11851479. DOI: 10.1093/jscr/rjaf065.

Postoperative MRI Visualization of the Cervical Spine Following Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Prospective Single-Center Comparison of a Titanium and Cobalt-Chromium Prosthesis.

Byvaltsev V, Kalinin A, Aliyev M, Riew K Global Spine J. 2021; 13(1):67-73.

PMID: 33504201 PMC: 9837519. DOI: 10.1177/2192568221991105.

Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation after implantation of a titanium cervical disc prosthesis: a comparison of 1.5 and 3 Tesla magnet strength.

Sundseth J, Jacobsen E, Kolstad F, Nygaard O, Zwart J, Hol P Eur Spine J. 2013; 22(10):2296-302.

PMID: 24061966 PMC: 3804698. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-013-2994-z.

[Imaging of sacral chordoma: comparison between MRI and CT].

Plathow C, Weber M, Debus J, Kauczor H Radiologe. 2005; 45(1):63-8.

PMID: 15662521 DOI: 10.1007/s00117-003-1002-8.

References

NEW P, Rosen B, Brady T, Buonanno F, Kistler J, Burt C . Potential hazards and artifacts of ferromagnetic and nonferromagnetic surgical and dental materials and devices in nuclear magnetic resonance imaging. Radiology. 1983; 147(1):139-48. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.147.1.6828719. View

Watt I . Magnetic resonance imaging in orthopaedics. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1991; 73(4):539-50. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.73B4.2071633. View

Ebraheim N, Savolaine E, Zeiss J, Jackson W . Titanium hip implants for improved magnetic resonance and computed tomography examinations. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992; (275):194-8. View

Mechlin M, Thickman D, Kressel H, Gefter W, Joseph P . Magnetic resonance imaging of postoperative patients with metallic implants. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1984; 143(6):1281-4. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.143.6.1281. View

Djukic S, Genant H, Helms C, Holt R . Magnetic resonance imaging of the postoperative lumbar spine. Radiol Clin North Am. 1990; 28(2):341-60. View

Kagetsu N, Litt A . Important considerations in measurement of attractive force on metallic implants in MR imagers. Radiology. 1991; 179(2):505-8. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.179.2.2014301. View

Ebraheim N, Savolaine E, Stitgen S, Jackson W . Magnetic resonance imaging after pedicular screw fixation of the spine. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992; (279):133-7. View

Heindel W, FRIEDMANN G, Bunke J, Thomas B, Firsching R, Ernestus R . Artifacts in MR imaging after surgical intervention. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1986; 10(4):596-9. DOI: 10.1097/00004728-198607000-00009. View

Kanal E, Shellock F, Talagala L . Safety considerations in MR imaging. Radiology. 1990; 176(3):593-606. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.176.3.2202008. View

10.

Ballock R, Hajek P, Byrne T, Garfin S . The quality of magnetic resonance imaging, as affected by the composition of the halo orthosis. A brief note. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989; 71(3):431-4. View

11.

Tien R, Olson E, Zee C . Diseases of the lumbar spine: findings on fat-suppression MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1992; 159(1):95-9. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.159.1.1609731. View

12.

Shellock F, Morisoli S, Kanal E . MR procedures and biomedical implants, materials, and devices: 1993 update. Radiology. 1993; 189(2):587-99. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.189.2.8210394. View

13.

Lyons C, Betz R, Mesgarzadeh M, REVESZ G, Bonakdarpour A, Clancy M . The effect of magnetic resonance imaging on metal spine implants. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1989; 14(7):670-2. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-198907000-00004. View

14.

Tartaglino L, Flanders A, Vinitski S, Friedman D . Metallic artifacts on MR images of the postoperative spine: reduction with fast spin-echo techniques. Radiology. 1994; 190(2):565-9. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.190.2.8284417. View

15.

Laakman R, Kaufman B, Han J, Nelson A, Clampitt M, OBlock A . MR imaging in patients with metallic implants. Radiology. 1985; 157(3):711-4. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.157.3.4059558. View

16.

Shellock F, Crues J . High-field-strength MR imaging and metallic biomedical implants: an ex vivo evaluation of deflection forces. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1988; 151(2):389-92. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.151.2.389. View

17.

Augustiny N, von Schulthess G, Meier D, Bosiger P . MR imaging of large nonferromagnetic metallic implants at 1.5 T. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1987; 11(4):678-83. DOI: 10.1097/00004728-198707000-00024. View

18.

Avrahami E, Tadmor R, Feibel M, Ram Z, Shacked I . Magnetic resonance demonstration of the cervical spine after anterior discectomy using acrylic cement. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993; 18(3):410-2. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199303000-00022. View

19.

Shellock F, Curtis J . MR imaging and biomedical implants, materials, and devices: an updated review. Radiology. 1991; 180(2):541-50. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.180.2.2068325. View

20.

Rupp R, Ebraheim N, Savolaine E, Jackson W . Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of the spine with metal implants. General safety and superior imaging with titanium. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993; 18(3):379-85. View