Whole-Brain Functional and Diffusion Tensor MRI in Human Participants with Metallic Orthodontic Braces.

Background MRI performed with echo-planar imaging (EPI) sequences is sensitive to susceptibility artifacts in the presence of metallic objects, which presents a substantial barrier for performing functional MRI and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) in patients with metallic orthodontic material and other head implants. Purpose To evaluate the ability to reduce susceptibility artifacts in healthy human participants wearing metallic orthodontic braces for two alternative approaches: T2-prepared functional MRI and diffusion-prepared DTI with three-dimensional fast gradient-echo readout. Materials and Methods In this prospective study conducted from February to September 2018, T2-prepared functional MRI and diffusion-prepared DTI were performed in healthy human participants. Removable dental braces with bonding trays were used so that MRI could be performed with braces and without braces in the same participants. Results were evaluated in regions with strong (EPI dropout regions for functional MRI and the inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus for DTI) and minimal (motor cortex for functional MRI and the posterior limb of internal capsule for DTI) susceptibility artifacts. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio for functional MRI, apparent diffusion coefficient and fractional anisotropy for DTI, and degree of distortion (quantified with the Jaccard index, which measures the similarity of geometric shapes) were compared in regions with strong or minimal susceptibility effects between the current standard EPI sequences and the proposed alternatives by using paired t test. Results Six participants were evaluated (mean age ± standard deviation, 40 years ± 6; three women). In brain regions with strong susceptibility effects from the metallic braces, T2-prepared functional MRI showed significantly higher SNR (37.8 ± 2.4 vs 15.5 ± 5.3; P < .001) and contrast-to-noise ratio (0.83 ± 0.16 vs 0.29 ± 0.10; P < .001), whereas diffusion-prepared DTI showed higher SNR (5.8 ± 1.5 vs 3.8 ± 0.7; P = .03) than did conventional EPI methods. Apparent diffusion coefficient and fractional anisotropy were consistent with the literature. Geometric distortion was substantially reduced throughout the brain with the proposed methods (significantly higher Jaccard index, 0.95 ± 0.12 vs 0.81 ± 0.61; P < .001). Conclusion T2-prepared functional MRI and diffusion-prepared diffusion tensor imaging can acquire functional and diffusion MRI, respectively, in healthy human participants wearing metallic dental braces with less susceptibility artifacts and geometric distortion than with conventional echo-planar imaging. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Dietrich in this issue.

[1]  C. Bettegowda,et al.  Repeatability of language fMRI lateralization and localization metrics in brain tumor patients , 2018, Human brain mapping.

[2]  A. Nederveen,et al.  Diffusion‐prepared stimulated‐echo turbo spin echo (DPsti‐TSE): An eddy current‐insensitive sequence for three‐dimensional high‐resolution and undistorted diffusion‐weighted imaging , 2017, NMR in biomedicine.

[3]  J. Pekar,et al.  Language Mapping Using T2-Prepared BOLD Functional MRI in the Presence of Large Susceptibility Artifacts—Initial Results in Patients With Brain Tumor and Epilepsy , 2017, Tomography.

[4]  Osamu Abe,et al.  Adverse effects of metallic artifacts on voxel-wise analysis and tract-based spatial statistics in diffusion tensor imaging , 2017, Acta radiologica.

[5]  M. Hood Reference Manual for Magnetic Resonance Safety, Implants, and Devices , 2016 .

[6]  K. Yamashita,et al.  Evaluation of diffusivity in pituitary adenoma: 3D turbo field echo with diffusion-sensitized driven-equilibrium preparation. , 2016, The British journal of radiology.

[7]  J. Tournier,et al.  Introduction to Diffusion Tensor Imaging , 2016 .

[8]  Marzena Wylezinska,et al.  Impact of orthodontic appliances on the quality of craniofacial anatomical magnetic resonance imaging and real-time speech imaging. , 2015, European journal of orthodontics.

[9]  Jun Hua,et al.  Whole‐brain three‐dimensional T2‐weighted BOLD functional magnetic resonance imaging at 7 Tesla , 2014, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[10]  Steen Moeller,et al.  Advances in diffusion MRI acquisition and processing in the Human Connectome Project , 2013, NeuroImage.

[11]  Jun Hua,et al.  Cerebrovascular reactivity mapping for brain tumor presurgical planning. , 2011, World journal of clinical oncology.

[12]  John M Pauly,et al.  SEMAC: Slice encoding for metal artifact correction in MRI , 2009, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[13]  C. Yasuda,et al.  Artifacts in brain magnetic resonance imaging due to metallic dental objects. , 2009, Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal.

[14]  Z. Starcuk,et al.  Magnetic susceptibility and electrical conductivity of metallic dental materials and their impact on MR imaging artifacts. , 2008, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[15]  Peter Boesiger,et al.  Cardiac SSFP imaging at 3 Tesla , 2004, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[16]  Eun-Kee Jeong,et al.  High‐resolution diffusion‐weighted 3D MRI, using diffusion‐weighted driven‐equilibrium (DW‐DE) and multishot segmented 3D‐SSFP without navigator echoes , 2003, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[17]  Zhi-Pei Liang,et al.  Technical challenges of functional magnetic resonance imaging , 2000 .

[18]  R Turner,et al.  Technical challenges of functional magnetic resonance imaging. , 2000, IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine.

[19]  J. Gore,et al.  Measurement of the point spread function in MRI using constant time imaging , 1997, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[20]  U. Sinha,et al.  High speed diffusion imaging in the presence of eddy currents , 1996, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[21]  R R Price,et al.  Diffusion imaging with the MP‐rage sequence , 1994, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[22]  T. Parrish,et al.  A new T2 preparation technique for ultrafast gradient‐echo sequence , 1994, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[23]  T. Carpenter,et al.  Diffusion imaging with unshielded gradients , 1992 .

[24]  E. Christiansen,et al.  Dental material artifacts on MR images. , 1988, Radiology.

[25]  W S Hinshaw,et al.  Potential hazards and artifacts of ferromagnetic and nonferromagnetic surgical and dental materials and devices in nuclear magnetic resonance imaging. , 1983, Radiology.